REPORT 


COMMITTEE  ON  SLAVERY, 


Contention  of  Congregational   ministers 


MASSACHUSETTS. 


PRESENTED   MAY   30,   1849. 


BOSTON: 

PRESS   OF  T.  R.  MARVIN,   24   CONGRESS   STREET. 

1849. 


REPORT 


COMMITTEE  ON  SLAVERY, 


€onucntion  of  Congregational   .ministers 


MASSACHUSETTS. 


PRESENTED   MAY   30,   1849. 


BOSTON: 

PRESS   OF  T.  R.  MARVIN,  24   CONGRESS   STREET. 
1849. 


CONTENTS. 


Page. 

Historical  Sketches  of  Slavery,  particularly  in  the  United  States,  .  .  5 

The  teaching  of  the  Scriptures  on  the  subject, 13 

The  malediction  of  Noah  considered,  16 

Slavery  in  the  times  of  the  Patriarchs, 22 

Slavery  under  the  law  of  Moses, 25 

How  treated  by  Christ  and  the  Apostles,  .  37 

Efforts  in  opposition  to  Slavery,  57 

Modes  of  influence  at  the  present  time 60 

Results  of  Colonization,  particularly  as  proving  the  capacity  of  the  Africans 

for  self-government 62 

The  moral  sentiment  of  the  Christian  world,  on  the  subject  of  Slavery,  .  65 

The  connection  between  Slavery  and  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  68 

The  right  of  property  as  affected  by  Emancipation, 79 

Motives  which  should  induce  all  American  citizens  to  seek  the  extinction 

of  Slavery  throughout  our  land,            .        .        .        .        .        .        .  83 

Appendix— Extract  from  the  "  Madison  Papers," 90 


Extracts  from  Minutes  of  the  Convention  of  Congregational  Minis- 
ters of  Massachusetts. 

THURSDAY,  JUNE  1,  1848. 

Resolved,  That  a  Committee  of  nine  be  appointed  to  prepare  a 
Report, — to  be  presented  at  the  next  Annual  Meeting  of  this  Conven- 
tion,— containing  a  brief  history  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  Slavery  in 
our  country,  a  view  of  the  responsibility  of  the  free  States  in  regard 
to  it,  and  a  calm  and  temperate,  but  solemn  and  earnest  appeal  to  the 
community  on  this  momentous  subject.* 

The  following  members  were  appointed  : — Dr.  Lowell,  of  Boston  ; 
Dr.  Hitchcock,  of  Randolph  ;  Dr.  Storrs,  of  Braintree  ;  Mr.  Thomp- 
son, of  Salem  ;  Dr.  Worcester,  of  Salem  ;  Mr.  Briggs,  of  Plymouth  ; 
Mr.  Hill,  of  Worcester ;  Dr.  Child,  of  Lowell ;  Mr.  Lothrop,  of 
Boston. 

THURSDAY,  MAY  31,  1849. 

Voted,  That  the  Committee  on  Slavery  be  authorized  to  publish 
the  following  resolution  in  connection  with  their  Report  : 

Resolved,  That  the  Convention,  having  listened  to  a  full  Abstract  of 
the  Document  prepared  by  the  Committee  appointed  last  year  to  con- 
sider and  report  upon  the  subject  of  Slavery,  approve  of  the  general 
principles  and  results  of  the  same ;  and  without  holding  themselves 
responsible  for  its  particular  arguments  and  illustrations,  hereby 
authorize  its  publication,  in  such  way  as  said  Committee  may  deem 
best,  and  can  effect,  without  drawing  upon  the  funds  of  the  Conven- 
tion, which  are  sacredly  appropriated  to  the  relief  of  the  widows  and 
orphans  of  our  deceased  brethren. 
A  true  copy. — Attest, 

A.  C.  THOMPSON, 

Scribe  of  Convention. 

The  "  Abstract "  to  which  the  last  vote  of  the  Convention  refers, 
and  which  was  read,  the  afternoon  previous,  contained,  as  is  intimated, 
a  very  full  synopsis  of  the  Report.  It  embodied  all  the  important 
principles  and  doctrines,  premises  and  conclusions,  which  are  present- 
ed in  the  following  pages ;  and,  perhaps,  if  it  had  been  submitted  as 

*  On  motion  of  Dr.  Lowell. 


8G9441 


the  Report  itself,  would  alone  have  been  sufficient  to  assure  the  Con- 
vention, that  the  Committee  had  not  lightly  regarded  the  service,  to 
which  they  had  been  called. 

After  considerable  discussion  in  regard  to  the  question  of  hearing 
the  "  Abstract "  or  the  whole  "  Report,"  it  was  decided  that  the 
former  should  be  read.  It  was  received  with  a  very  marked  expres- 
sion of  approval,  and  was  immediately  adopted; — a  single  hand  only 
being  raised  in  the  negative,  and  this  not  being  observed  by  the 
Chairman,  the  vote  was  declared  to  be  unanimous.  The  whole 
Report  was  then  re-committed,  with  authority  to  publish  it,  provided 
the  means  of  defraying  the  expense  could  be  secured  by  the  Com- 
mittee. 

From  the  animated  and  earnest  response,  on  all  sides,  to  the  senti- 
ments and  statements  of  the  "  Abstract,"  the  Committee  are  confident 
that  if  the  time  could  have  been  found  for  a  hearing  of  the  full  Report — 
and  if  the  whole  of  our  numerous  body,  exceeding  five  hundred  mem- 
bers, could  have  been  present — the  Report  itself,  in  all  its  length  and 
breadth,  would  have  received  the  sanction  and  seal  of  a  prompt  and 
cordial  adoption,  by  an  overwhelming,  if  not  unanimous  vote.  They 
are  sure,  that  no  exception  would  have  been  taken,  by  any  considera- 
ble number,  to  any  part  of  the  Report  which  the  Committee  them- 
selves would  be  solicitous  to  retain,  as  being  indispensable,  or  quite 
essential,  to  their  main  argument  and  appeal.  And  they  deem  it 
proper  to  add,  that  they  have  sought  to  execute  their  commission  with 
a  just  sense  of  the  magnitude  of  their  responsibility  ;  and,  as  they 
trust,  with  fervent  supplication  to  the  "  Father  of  lights,"  from  whom 
"  cometh  down  every  good  gift  and  every  perfect  gift." 

By  agreement'  in  the  Committee,  soon  after  their  appointment,  each 
member  was  assigned  a  specific  part  of  the  general  subject,  in  order 
that  the  work  might  be  more  effectually  performed,  than  could  reason- 
ably have  been  anticipated,  if  the  whole  labor  had  been  imposed  upon 
any  one  member,  or  even  upon  a  sub-committee.  With  a  single 
exception,  the  members  have  all,  more  or  less,  contributed  to  the 
preparation  of  the  Report.  As  an  unavoidable  consequence,  it  is 
somewhat  more  detailed  and  less  comprehensive,  than  it  might  other- 
wise have  been.  The  Committee  would  hope,  however,  that  with  all 
its  defects,  it  will  be  found  to  be  essentially  homogeneous  ;  and  as  a 
whole,  not  unworthy  of  the  candid  and  attentive  consideration  of  their 
brethren  and  of  their  fellow-citizens  generally. 


REPORT. 


IN  the  examination  of  the  subject  before  us,  our  attention  is 
first  called   to  the  History  of  Slavery.     Of  this,  however,  an 
outline  is  all  that  we  can  present ;  since  a  statement  of  the  de-* 
tails,  in  their  various  connections,  would  be  nothing  short  of  a 
universal  history. 

The  first  slaves,  it  is  believed,  were  captives  in  war.  These 
were  considered  entirely  at  the  disposal  of  their  captors,  and  a 
life-long  condition  of  bondage  was  probably  felt  to  be  an  equi- 
table commutation  for  their  lives.*  There  was  also  this  feature 
of  equity  in  the  system,  that  its  oppressions  were  not  restricted 
to  a  single  race,  nor  dependent  upon  shades  of  complexion. 
Nor  did  slavery  in  the  earliest  times  present  an  insuperable 
barrier  to  ambition,  and  reduce  to  a  dead  level  of  outward  con- 
dition all  grades  of  intellectual  and  moral  power.  Thus  we 
find  Joseph  becoming  prime  minister  of  Egypt,  and  this,  toor 
without  sacrificing  his  religion  to  the  prejudices  of  that 
country. 

Though  we  have  no  means  of  determining  the  exact  relation 
and  treatment  of  slaves,  at  so  early  a  period,  yet  it  is  sufficient- 
ly clear,  that  the  bondage  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  was  of  a 
political,  rather  than  of  a  personal  character.  They  were  not 
the  private  property  of  individuals,  but  were  compelled  to  labor 
upon  public  works.  They  certainly  were  not  disabled  from 
acquiring  and  retaining  private  property  ;  and  it  is  probable, 
that  their  condition  was  not  worse  than  that  of  the  lower  orders 
of  the  Egyptians  themselves.  Moreover,  a  purely  political 
reason  is  assigned  for  the  oppressions  which  were  heaped  upon 
them.  After  their  establishment  in  the  promised  land,  a  system 
of  slavery  was  tolerated  among  them,  but  very  different  in 

*"  The  Latin  word  '  servus,'  a  slave,  appears  to  have  been  derived  from  '  servo,'  / 
preserve,  and  to  have  meant  a  person  whose  life  was  preserved  on  condition  of  giving 
his  labor  to  his  conqueror ;  so  that  slavery,  how  repulsive  soever  to  our  present 
feelings,  probably  formed  at  one  time  an  important  mitigation  of  the  horrors  of  bar- 
barism."— Brande's  Encyclopedia,  Art.  Slavery. 

2 


some  important  particulars  from  that  existing  among  their  co- 
temporaries  in 'any  part  of  the  world.  In  our  examination  of 
the  Scriptures,  with  reference  to  this  subject  generally,  we 
shall  have  occasion  to  describe  the  servitude  which  existed 
under  the  laws  of  Moses,  somewhat  minutely.  It  is  sufficient, 
therefore,  to  remark  in  this  place,  that  the  Hebrews  were 
taught  by  the  principles  and  by  the  precepts  of  their  religion, 
that  personal  freedom  is  an  inestimable  privilege  j  and,  that 
wherever  involuntary  servitude  is  found  to  exist,  the  evils  at- 
tending it,  whether  physical  or  moral,  ought,  as  far  as  possible, 
to  be  mitigated  and  diminished,  in  obedience  to  the  law  of  love 
to  God  and  love  to  man.  In  general,  the  requirements  of  the 
Mosaic  code  respecting  servants  who  were  of  the  Hebrews,  and 
u  bond-men  "  and  "  bond-maids  "  that  might  be  bought  of  the 
^heathen,  were  so  far  observed,  that  the  actual  condition  of  this 
class  of  persons  in  the  land  of  Israel  must  have  been  incompa- 
rably superior  to  that  of  the  slaves  among  the  Gentiles.  And 
the  evidence  is  ample  and  decisive,  that  even  the  system  of 
slavery  which  Moses  did  not  prohibit,  but,  to  a  certain  extent, 
suffered  to  remain  among  the  chosen  people,  was  continually 
in  conflict  with  uncompromising  antagonistical  elements,  both 
in  the  means  and  ends  of  the  beneficent  institutions  of  the  He- 
brew commonwealth.  The  natural  effect  of  those  institutions 
was,  to  ameliorate  the  condition  of  slaves  in  every  respect,  and 
ultimately  to  abolish  the  practice  of  slave-holding.  It  is  a  fact 
worthy  of  particular  notice  in  this  connection,  that  if  a  bond- 
woman bore  a  child  to  her  master,  the  child  followed  the  condi- 
tion of  the  father.  The  doctrine  of  parlus  sequitur  ventrem,  is 
of  much  later  origin. 

In  several  respects  the  condition  of  slaves  in  Mohammedan 
nations  has  been  similar  to  that  of  those  among  the  ancient 
Israelites ;  and  we  shall  therefore  refer  to  it  in  this  place,  al- 
though out  of  chronological  order. — Under  Mohammedan  law, 
slaves  may  compel  their  masters  to  set  a  price  for  their  redemp- 
tion, or  to  sell  them  to  another  master.  The  Turks  make  no 
distinction  in  the  treatment  of  children  born  to  them  by  their 
female  slaves  and  those  born  in  wedlock.  The  mother  of  a 
sultan  may  be  a  slave.  Christian  slaves  also  may  obtain  their 
freedom  by  professing  Mohammedanism.  In  general,  the  treat- 
ment of  slaves  wherever  this  religion  prevails,  appears  to  par- 
take of  the  lenity  and  humanity  of  the  Jewish  system.  The 
condition  of  Christian  captives  in  the  Barbary  States  may  appear 
to  offer  an  exception ;  but  the  cruelties  to  which  they  were 
subjected,  may  be  ascribed  either  to  the  desire  of  revenge,  or  ihe 
hope  of  extorting  a  larger  or  speedier  ransom.  To  recent 
movements  with  reference  to  slavery  in  those  States,  we  shall 
refer  in  another  part  of  our  Report. 


Returning  now  to  the  ancient  nations, — Homer  may  be  cited 
in  proof  of  the  early  existence  of  slavery  among  the  Greeks. 
It  is  to  be  remembered,  that  Homer  was  an  Asiatic,  and  his 
pictures  of  domestic  life  have  often  an  Asiatic  coloring.  At 
most  he  is  only  authority  for  the  slavery  of  captives  of  war. 
In  the  nature  of  things  it  would  seem  scarcely  possible,  that 
slaves  could  be  numerous  among  a  simple  and  hardy  people. 

Slaves  in  Greece  were  of  two  kinds.  The  Helots  of  Sparta 
were. serfs  (adscript!  glebas)  who  were  bound  to  the  soil  which 
they  cultivated,  and  on  which  they  paid  a  certain  rent.  At 
Corinth  and  Athens,  slaves  were  chattels  personal.  They  be- 
came in  time  so  numerous  and  skilful,  that  every  species  of 
handicraft  was  performed  by  them.  With  the  exception  of 
those  employed  in  the  mines,  they  seem  to  have  been  not  un- 
kindly treated.  They  were  under  the  protection  of  law,  and 
an  Athenian  slave  could  take  refuge  from  the  cruelty  of  his 
owner  in  the  temple  of  Theseus.  He  could  also  compel  his 
master  to  sell  him;  but  whether  he  could  buy  his  own  freedom 
is  doubtful.  But  whatever  features  of  mildness  slavery  may 
have  assumed  among  the  Greeks,  can  any  one,  who  is  at  all 
conversant  with  their  history,  believe  that  they  ever  reaped  any 
moral  or  social  advantage  from  it  ?  Did  any  of  them  enjoy  a 
purer  or  more  ennobling  freedom,  by  the  ignominious  thraldom 
of  a  portion  of  their  community  ? 

We  find  traces  of  slavery  in  the  earliest  history  of  Rome. 
Slaves,  however,  were,  at  first,  very  few  in  number.  They 
were  captives,  were  employed  in  agriculture,  and  were  treated, 
probably,  like  other  servants.  We  find  that  they  sat  at  the 
same  table  with  their  masters.  As  luxury  increased,  the  num- 
ber of  slaves  became  larger.  And  beside  the  immense  multi- 
tude of  captives  taken  in  the  constant  wars  of  the  republic, 
there  grew  up  a  regular  slave  trade,  by  which  slaves  were  pro- 
cured from  Asia  and  Africa.  Nevertheless,  the  dealers  in  slaves 
were  a  disreputable  and  odious  class  ;  and  were  not  allowed  to 
assume  the  title  of  merchants. 

While  the  Roman  laws  allowed  the  exercise  of  great  severity 
in  the  treatment  of  slaves,  even  to  the  extent  of  taking  life, 
there  were  yet  some  important  advantages  enjoyed  by  the 
slaves,  as  compared  with  those  of  our  own  country.  The  slave, 
under  certain  prescribed  conditions,  could  acquire  property. 
There  was  no  bar  to  his  emancipation  by  his  master,  and  he 
became  a  citizen  as  soon  as  emancipated.  When  .slaves  were 
sold,  families  could  not  be  separated.  The  general  condition 
of  the  slaves  improved  gradually  with  the  advance  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  the  system  itself  finally  disappeared — either  being 
merged  in  the  serfdom  of  the  feudal  institutions,  or  abolished 
altogether. 


8 

From  that  serfdom  to  entire  enfranchisement,  the  progress 
was  gradual,  but  steady.  The  law  seems  to  have  leaned  strong- 
ly toward  liberty;  and  the  lawyers  were  strenuous  in  asserting 
the  most  liberal  interpretation  of  it.  In  this  way  the  lord's 
tenure  of  his  serf  Was  rendered  as  uncertain  and  vexatious  as 
possible.  What  was  unjust  was  made  inconvenient.  The 
popular  element  of  the  commonwealth  asserted  itself  with  more 
and  more  distinctness  ;  and  serfdom  crumbled  away  like  those 
material  relics  of  the  past  which  are  disentombed  from  ancient 
repositories  of  the  dead,  by  the  simple  contact  of  a  freer  atmos- 
phere. 

In  looking  at  the  several  species  of  human  bondage,  at  which 
we  have  thus  glanced,  while  our  sympathies  are  appealed  to  by 
their  evident  injustice,  the  mind  is  not  impressed  with  any 
logical  inconsequence.  They  were  in  keeping  with  the  spirit 
and  principles  of  the  times.  But  in  considering  the  slavery  of 
the  African  race  in  America,  not  only  are  we  pained  by  its  in- 
humanity and  its  open  breach  of  the  acknowledged  principles 
of  justice,  but  we  are  sensible  that  it  is  an  anachronism. 

Slavery  in  the  ancient  world,  and  at  the  present  day  in  the 
East,  appears  a  natural  and  necessary  part  of  the  political  fabric. 
It  is  supported  on  every  side  by  kindred  institutions,  like  a 
stone  in  mosaic.  Natural  justice  has  been  the  same  in  all  ages; 
but  the  limits  to  the  view  which  each  generation  is  enabled  to 
take  of  it,  are  in  a  great  measure  defined  by  habit,  education 
and  surrounding  circumstances.  Thus  we  find  even  Luther, 
taking  sides  against  the  insurgent  serfs,  because  the  absorption 
of  his  mind  in  one  object,  as  we  may  conjecture,  did  not  allow 
him  to  perceive,  that  their  movement  was  a  fair  political  corol- 
lary from  the  premises  which  he  had  established  in  spiritual 
matters.  In  this  way  we  may  conceive,  that  certain  forms  of 
the  social  system  which  the  pure  reason  must  disown,  may  still 
be  in  unison  with  the  demands  of  the  reasoning  faculty,  as 
logical  deductions  from  premises  universally  granted.  But 
American  slavery  has  no  such  congruity.  On  the  contrary,  it 
is  in  direct  antagonism  to  the  premises  on  which  our  govern- 
ment rests;  and  involves  us  every  day  in  fresh  contradictions 
and  compromises. 

We  have  now  reached  the  point  in  our  survey  where  it  is 
proper  to  state  the  leading  facts  in  the  history  of  American 
Slavery— passing  at  once  from  the  ancient  to  the  modern  aspect 
of  the  institution. 

The  first  negroes,  enslaved  by  a  Christian  nation  in  modern 
times,  were  brought  to  Portugal,  about  fifty  years  before  the 
discovery  of  America.  Some  of  their  enslavers,  in  the  first 
instance,  were  actuated  by  motives  of  benevolence  ;  conceiving 
that  the  simple  ceremony  of  baptism  secured  their  eternal  sal- 


vation.  From  this  chance  seed,  nevertheless,  sprang  the  deadly 
upas  of  American  slavery.*  The  Portuguese  gradually  establish- 
ed a  traffic  in  slaves,  but  not  upon  a  very  large  scale  ;  for,  except 
as  articles  of  luxury,  there  could  be  no  great  demand  for  them 
in  Spain  and  Portugal.  But  the  discovery  of  America,  by  open- 
ing new  fields  for  their  labor,  soon  rendered  the  business  per- 
manent and  profitable. 

As  long  as  Isabella  lived,  her  womanly  sympathies  were  in- 
terposed between  the  happy  and  gentle  islanders  of  the  Caribbean 
group  and  their  rapacious  invaders.  She  succeeded  in  prevent- 
ing their  enslavement,  at  least  in  name.  But  Spain  was  far  off 
and  the  gold  mines  were  near.  A  system  of  involuntary  and 
unrequited  labor  soon  arose,  which,  shortly  after  the  death  of 
Isabella,  assumed  the  name,  as  it  had  already  displayed  all  the 
attributes,  of  Slavery.  History  has  but  faintly  recorded  (for 
words  are  weak)  the  atrocities  of  which  the  Spanish  colonists 
were  guilty  toward  that  race  which  Columbus  described  as 
Christians  in  all  but  the  name.  They  who  read  the  past  wisely, 
should  not  forget  how  Hayti,  where  slavery  was  first  planted, 
went  through  a  fearful  purgation  of  blood  and  flame. 

It  is  well  known,  that,  when  in  the  sixteenth  century  it 
was  proposed  to  different  powers  of  Europe  to  legislate  for  the 
transportation  of  Africans,  as  slaves,  to  supply  the  alleged 
necessities  of  the  colonies  in  America,  the  purpose  shocked  the 
moral  sense  of  all  Christendom !  And  yet  not  a  thousandth 
part  of  the  atrocities  of  the  slave-trade  had  begun  to  be  known 
or  imagined.  It  was  only  by  the  most  artful  and  unwearied 
management  and  deception,  that  the  sovereigns  of  Spain,  France 
and  England,  were  induced  to  give  a  partial  and  restricted  in- 
dulgence to  the  detestable  traffic.  A  dispute  between  the 
Franciscans  who  encouraged  and  the  Dominicans  who  denoun- 
ced both  the  slave-trade  and  the  system  of  slavery,  was  adjudi- 
cated by  Leo  X.,  whose  righteous  decision  was,  that  "  not  only 
the  Christian  religion,  but  nature  herself,  cried  out  against 
Slavery  !  " 

•  The  desire  of  gold  had  become  only  more  insatiable  by  a  par- 
tial satisfaction.  The  mines  demanded  new  victims,  and,  the 
natives  having  been  literally  annihilated,  the  loss  must  be  sup- 
plied from  Africa.  For  more  than  three  hundred  years  the 
trade  in  human  flesh  has  been  carried  on.  For  more  than  three 
hundred  years  the  slave-ship  has  been  almost  the  only  messen- 
ger which  Christendom  has  sent  forth  to  Africa.  Denounced 
by  all  civilized  men,  this  accursed  traffic  has  still  continued  to 
flourish,  and  must  continue  while  the  system  that  gives  it  life 
is  tolerated.  It  should  be  for  our  instruction  and  our  gratitude, 
that  our  New  England  ancestors,  true  to  their  principles  and 
their  piety,  strenuously,  though  ineffectually,  withstood  the  in- 
2* 


10 

troduction  of  slaves  amongst  them.  But  subject  as  they  were 
to  the  overshadowing  power  of  the  mother  country,  they  could 
not  do  as  they  would ;  and  a  minority  of  the  population  pre- 
vailed against  a  decided  preponderance  of  public  sentiment. 

Sir  John  Hawkins  was  the  first  Englishman  who  made  a 
voyage  to  the  African  coast  for  slaves.  In  his  second  venture 
Royalty  went  partner.  Slaves  were  introduced  into  the  Eng- 
lish colonies  in  America  as  soon  as  it  became,  profitable  to 
introduce  them.  In  Massachusetts  the  system  of  slavery  never 
took  kindly  root,  and  the  first  efforts  for  its  abolition  were  made 
here.  Early  in  the  history  of  the  colony,  the  captain  of  a 
vessel  who  had  brought  some  negroes  hither  from  Africa  was 
ordered  by  the  General  Court  to  carry  them  back  ;  and  by  the 
very  act  which  gave  her  existence  as  an  independent  State, 
Massachusetts  proclaimed  liberty  to  her  bond-men. 

If  it  be  undeniable,  that  a  portion  of  New  England  commerce 
for  many  years  participated  largely  in  the  "  merchandize  "  of 
men,  it  was  with  no  better  defence  than  "  the  son  of  perdition" 
could  have  made  for  betraying  his  Lord  "  to  be  crucified  and 
slain."  The  public  sentiment  of  Massachusetts,  and  of  New 
England  generally,  was  irreconcilably  opposed  to  the  principle 
and  the  practice  of  slave-holding ;  and  the  intervals  were  brief,  if 
they  occurred  at  all,  in  which  there  were  not  in  the  pulpit  and 
out  of  the  pulpit,  unsleeping  and  indomitable  witnesses  for  truth 
and  righteousness,  who  "  lifted  up  their  voice  like  a  trumpet  " 
and  "  spared  not,"  while  a  portion  of  their  fellow-citizens,  with 
a  few  "brethren  in  the  Lord,"  delayed  to  loose  the  bonds  of 
wickedness,  to  undo  the  heavy  burdens,  and  to  let  the  oppress- 
ed go  free. 

But  the  two  great  crises  in  the  history  of  American  slavery, 
and  the  consideration  of  which  will  be  more  immediately  to 
our  purpose,  were  the  adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitution  in 
1787,  and  the  admission  of  Missouri  as  a  slave  State  in  1820. 

After  the  war  of  the  Revolution  had  been  brought  to  an  end, 
it  was  very  generally  felt  that  the  holding  of  slaves  was  grossly 
inconsistent  with  the  principles  on  which  were  grounded  our 
own  claims  to  freedom.  Though  the  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence, inspired  by  the  sublimity  of  the  occasion,  laid  down 
axioms  in  advance  of  the  public  opinion  and  practice  of  the 
day,  it  accorded  well  with  the  undefined  feeling  of  an  excited 
people.  But  when  the  ennobling  and  invigorating  impulse  of  a 
struggle  for  liberty  was  withdrawn  from  men's  minds  and  al- 
lowed them  to  recede  to  their  habitual  level,  and  when  selfish 
interests  were  enabled  to  renew  their  hold,  it  was  found  that 
the  love  of  gain  had  lost  none  of  its  power;  and  the  conduct 
of  the  several  States  in  regard  to  slavery,  was  far  too  much 
graduated  by  the  scale  of  profit.  In  the  Eastern  States,  heredi- 


11 

tary  or  acquired  principles  of  justice  and  mercy,  unquestionably 
exerted  a  paramount  influence  to  bring  about  emancipation. 
But  we  cannot  concede  them  an  unqualified  commendation  on 
this  score  ;  because  a  supposed  commercial  interest  was  permit- 
ted to  prevail  against  the  decisions  of  public  sentiment,  in  re- 
gard to  the  impolicy  and  wickedness  of  the  slave-trade. 

We  have  called  the  period  of  the  adoption  of  the  Federal 
Constitution  a  crisis  in  the  history  of  slavery  ;  because  at  that 
time  the  slave-power,  which  has  since  made  such  formidable 
usurpations,  was  a  trembling  petitioner  for  the  license  even  to 
exist  at  all. 

A  reference  to  the  "Madison  Papers"  will  show,  that  a  con- 
tinuance of  the  slave-trade  till  the  year  1808,  was  conceded  to 
the  clamors  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia ;  and  we  think  it 
clear  even  from  such  fragments  as  remain  to  us  of  the  debates 
of  the  Federal  Convention,  that  the  majority  of  the  members 
of  that  body  looked 'upon  the  extinction  of  the  slave-trade  and 
of  slavery  as  synonymous.  And  it  was  universally  supposed  at 
that  time,  that  the  number  of  slaves  could  only  be  kept  from  di- 
minishing by  fresh  importations.  For  this  reason  the  word 
Slave  was  carefully  excluded  from  the  Constitution,  that,  when 
Human  Bondage  became  a  thing  of  the  past,  no  trace  of  its  ex- 
istence, even,  much  less  suspicion  of  connivance,  should  leave 
its  stain  upon  that  instrument.  "  I  think  it  wrong  to  admit  in 
the  Constitution  the  idea  that  there  can  be  property  in  man." 
So  said  Mr.  Madison  in  the  Convention,  and  in  so  saying  he 
echoed  the  sentiments  of  a  large  majority  of  the  members  from 
all  sections  of  the  country.  Throughout  the  debates  on  the 
slavery-clauses  of  the  Constitution,  it  is  very  clear,  that  the 
advocates  of  slavery  acted  entirely  on  the  defensive.  It  could 
not  well  be  otherwise,  since  almost  every  statesman,  eminent 
in  those  early  days  of  the  Republic,  has  left  on  record  his  un- 
qualified condemnation  of  the  system.  Some  of  the  heartiest 
denouncers  of  slavery  were  from  Maryland  and  Virginia. 

But  in  the  thirty-three  years  which  had  elapsed  between 
the  adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  arid  the  admission  of 
Missouri,  the  posture  of  affairs  had  entirely  changed.  Slavery 
now  for  the  first  time  became  aggressive,  and  the  protection  of 
liberty  which  was  intended  to  be  the  rule  of  our  government, 
had  grown  to  be  the  rare  exception.  By  the  stopping  of  the 
foreign  slave-trade,  and  the  stimulus  which  the  domestic  traffic 
received  from  the  increase  of  territory,  Maryland  and  Virginia 
had  been  seduced  from  their  allegiance  to  higher  and  humane 
sentiments,  and  had  already  become  the  Guinea  Coast  of  Amer- 
ica. The  admission  of  Missouri,  by  what  was  falsely  termed  a 
compromise,  for  there  can  be  no  compromise  with  what  is  abso- 
lutely wrong,  no  truce  between  God  and  Satan, — threw  at 


12 

once  the  prestige  of  victory  and  a  control  of  the  balance  of 
power  upon  the  side  of  the  slave-holders.  Since  that  fatal  and 
perfidious  day,  Freedom  has  been  constantly  driven  to  the  wall. 
A  small  aristocracy,  insignificant  in  point  of  numbers,  and  justly 
obnoxious  to  Christian  freemen  from  the  basis  on  which  their 
claim  to  superiority  rests,  scattered  over  a  wide  extent  of  terri- 
tory and  only  compact  in  a  strenuous  devotion  to  a  common  in- 
terest, have  swayed  the  destinies  of  this  mighty  nation,  and 
shaped  its  future,  as  far  as  possible,  to  a  necessary  coincidence 
with  its  mistaken  and  repented  past. 

In  comparing  American  slavery  with  the  modes  of  servitude 
which  have  existed  among  other  nations  and  in  other  ages  of 
the  world,  we  find  that,  although  agreeing  with  some  of  them 
in  many  particulars,  it  differs  in  one  important  point  from  them 
all.  Slavery,  wherever  and  whenever  it  has  elsewhere  existed, 
has  been  as  impartial  as  death.  There  was  no  one  whom  the 
chances  of  fortune  or  war  might  not  one  day  or  other  reduce  to 
bondage.  But  with  us,  complexion  has  been  made  the  criterion 
for  determining  the  capacity  of  a  human  being  for  freedom.  It 
is  a  singular  fact,  that,  while  the  African  physiognomy  and  com- 
plexion are  such  as  to  unlit  their  unhappy  possessor  fur  taking 
care  of  himself,  and  such  also  as  to  render  liberty  a  curse,  yet 
the  reward  with  which  the  American  master  repays  any  act  of 
\  peculiar  devotion  or  fidelity  on  the  part  of  his  slave,  is  emanci- 
\pation ! 

Another  distinguishing  characteristic  of  American  slavery  is, 
that  it  is  not  only  permitted  but  actually  fostered  by  a  nation 
foremost  of  all  in  receiving,  publishing,  and,  in  many  respects, 
exemplifying  the  great  idea  of  Human  Brotherhood.  It  is  con- 
generous with  nothing  in  our  political  system,  and  is  a  constant 
reproach  to  our  profession  of  the  religion  of  Christ.  The 
slave-holder  of  ancient  times,  if  called  on  for  his  title,  appealed 
to  what  was  then  the  acknowledged  law  of  nations,  which 
gave  the  captor  power  of  life  and  death  over  his  captive.  "  All 
that  a  man  hath  will  he  give  for  his  life,"  and  accordingly  a 
species  of  contract  was  supposed  between  master  and  slave,  the 
slave  rendering  service  as  an  equivalent  for  life.  It  is  vain  to 
seek  any  such  foundation  for  American  slavery.  Here  the 
slave-holder  justifies  himself,  either  by  the  color  of  his  victim, 
claiming  to  be  only  a  ful filler  of  the  prophecies  and  an  instru- 
ment of  God's  vengeance  ;  or  he  appeals  to  the  fact,  that  his 
inheritance  of  oppression  was  devolved  upon  him  from  his  an- 
cestors ;  thus  endeavoring  to  defend  the  continuance  of  a  wrong, 
by  showing  that  it  is  of  ancient  date,  and  to  give  injustice  a 
title  by  prescription.  Called  upon  to  produce  his  original  title, 
he  is  forced  to  go  back  to  the  jus  gentium  of  lawless  savages 
on  the  coast  of  Africa,  or  is  driven  finally  to  seek  refuge  behind 


13 

the  right  of  the  strongest ;  a  right  accidental  in  its  nature,  and 
peculiar  neither  to  white  nor  black,  but  liable  to  change  hands, 
as  it  already  has  done  in  Hayti. 


We  here  bring  this  preliminary  part  of  our  Report  to  a  close. 
By  presenting  an  outline  of  its  history,  we  have  hoped  to  give 
a  clear  and  just  idea  of  Slavery  as  it  has  actually  existed  in  dif- 
ferent ages  and  nations  of  the  world,  from  the  beginning  to  this 
day.  But  there  is  one  part  of  that  history  which,  connected 
as  it  is  with  Divine  Revelation,  constitutes  a  topic  by  itself, 
and  demands  an  extended  and  careful  examination.  We  refer 
to  what  is  contained  in  the  Scriptures  on  the  subject.  We  have 
devoted  much  attention  to  this  branch  of  our  inquiry, — deeming 
it  of  the  highest  importance  ;  and  we  proceed  to  exhibit  at 
length  the  train  of  investigation  which  we  have  pursued,  with 
the  results  which  we  have  reached. 


In  vindication  of  Slavery,  an  appeal  "has  often  been  made  to 
the  Scriptures,  as  if  the  slave-holder  had  authority  from  God,  to 
retain  and  employ  his  slaves,  at  his  option  and  discretion.  On 
the  other  hartd,  it  has  been  affirmed  by  some,  that  the  Scrip- 
tures, not  only  contain  no  warrant  for  modern  slave-holding, 
but  that  slavery  itself  had  no  existence  among  the  ancient  He- 
brews, or  in  the  families  of  any  who  are  recognized  as  God's 
sincere  friends,— whether  under  the  Mosaic  or  the  Christian 
dispensation.  Is  the  truth  in  either  of  these  extremes  ?  We 
think  not. 

There  are  those  who  cannot  account  for  the  toleration  or  per- 
mjssion  of  slavery,  among  the  Hebrews,  without  impeaching  the 
Divine  character.  With  others,  the  great  difficulty  is,  to  explain 
the  commonly  received  interpretations  of  the  Word  of  God, — if 
the  relation  of  master  and  slave  has  always  implied  guilt  on  the 
part  of  the  master.  And  there  is  certainly  an  apparent,  if  not 
real  conflict  between  natural  and  revealed  religion,  in  some  of 
the  views  which  have  often  been  presented,  both  on  the  one 
side  and  the  other  of  the  question, — ':  Whether  it  be  morally 
right  to  hold  our  fellow  man  as  a  slave." 

In  searching  the  Scriptures  our  object  has  been  to  ascertain, 
as  nearly  as  possible,  the  truth  and  the  whole  truth,  in  answer 
to  the  question,  which  we  regard  as  the  grand  question  of  all, 
viz. — "  Do  the  Scriptures  sanction  slavery,  as  it  exists  in  the 
United  States,  and  as  it  has  here  been  legalized  ? "  With  one 
voice,  and  without  any  reservation  or  qualification,  we  are  pre- 
pared to  answer,  NO. 


14 

We  are  unable  to  find  any  contradiction  in  the  Scriptures  to 
the  self-evident  truth  of  reason,  and  of  natural  religion,  that 
there  is  no  natural  right  in  the  relation  of  master  and  slave. — 
Have  we  not  all  one  Father? — Still,  it  may,  and  as  we  think, 
must  be  conceded,  that  circumstances,  under  the  providence  of 
the  Supreme  Disposer  of  events,  may  so  far  modify  natural 
right  or  natural  wrong,  that,  while  a  system  or  an  institution 
may  be  unwarranted  and  criminal, — the  personal  guilt  and  inno- 
cence of  individuals  may  be  materially  affected  by  their  social 
position,  their  knowledge,  their  motives,  feelings  and  purposes. 

As  another  preliminary  suggestion,  we  deem  it  important  to 
remark,  that,  as  the  present  use  of  words  may  be  no  guide  to 
their  etymology,  and  as  neither  present  use  nor  etymology  may 
determine  or  indicate  their  true  meaning,  at  certain  periods  of 
national  progress, — it  is  illogical  and  unsafe  to  infer  what  slavery 
was  at  the  beginning,  from  what  it  has  since  become  ;  or  that 
slavery  in  any  given  example,  is  or  was  the  same  as  in  any 
other  example. 

Slavery,  at  the  present  day,  is  every  where  understood  to  im- 
ply coercion  ;  and  coercion  of  that  kind  and  degree,  to  which, 
in  general,  none  would  submit,  if  they  were  not  kept  in  subjec- 
tion by  laws  framed  for  the  express  purpose  of  protecting  the 
master,  against  the  assertion  of  natural  rights  by  the  slave,  and 
his  claim  to  be  regarded  as  a  fellow-man  and  a  brother.  They 
produce  as  their  legitimate  effect,  a  degraded  and  demoralizing 
inferiority  and  disability  of  social  condition  ;  or,  at  least,  their 
whole  tendency  is  to  aggravate  and  perpetuate  such  a  condi- 
tion. 

Hence  we  may  well  inquire  whether  the  Scriptures  of  God, 
"  who  giveth  to  all  life,  and  breath,  and  all  things,  and  hath 
made  of  one  blood  all  nations  of  men  to  dwell  on  all  the  face 
of  the  earth,"  are  rightly  interpreted,  if  supposed  to  contain 
any  warrant  for  such  laws  ;  and  thus  a  relation  or  social  institu- 
tion, which  it  would  not  be  possible  to  sustain  without  them, 
can  urge  in  its  behalf  the  sanction  of  Divine  approval. 

Upon  some  subjects  of  importance,  it  is  well  known,  the 
Scriptures  are  silent;  upon  others  the  instruction  is  explicit  and 
full ;  while  upon  others  still  it  is  incidental  or  inferential.  Of 
this  latter  kind  is  the  witness  respecting  slavery.  The  relation 
of  master  and  slave  is  neither  required  nor  forbidden,  by  express 
commandment  or  ordinance,  under  the  Mosaic  or  the  Christian 
dispensation.  And  although  tolerated  and  legalized,  in  the 
case  of  the  Hebrews,  but  with  most  important  limitations  and 
counter-working  provisions,  slavery  has  no  commendation  or 
benediction  from  any  of  the  "  holy  men  of  God,  who  spake  as 
they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost."  There  is  thus  a  wide 
difference  between  the  teaching  of  revealed  truth,  in  regard  to. 


15 

the  relation  of  master  and  slave,  and  that  which  pertains  to 
civil  government.  Civil  government  is  manifestly  ordained  of 
God.  Loyalty  in  subjects  is  both  enjoined  and  blessed.  But 
the  condition  of  the  slave  is  always  presented  to  us,  as  having 
no  advantages  but  in  a  choice  of  evils  ;  and  as  being  most  ob- 
viously, in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  a  calamity  or  a  curse ; 
whatever  may  be  inferred,  in  respect  to  the  lawfulness  or  sin- 
fulness  of  the  relation  of  the  master. 

We  cannot  assent,  therefore,  to  the  bold  statement  of  a  very 
able  writer  in  one  of  our  religious  periodicals,  namely,  that 
"  slave-holding,  in  the  scriptural  view  of  it,  belongs  to  a  class  of 
things  indifferent,  of  things  neither  forbidden  nor  commanded 
in  the  word  of  God,  which  are  right  or  wrong  according  to 
circumstances.  It  is  like  despotism  in  the  stare."  * 

But  we  would  earnestly  inquire,  Where  has  God  taught  us, 
that  all  things  are  "  indifferent,"  if  neither  forbidden  nor  com- 
manded by  any  express  statute  or  prescription  ?  And  may  it 
not  be  a  very  important  inquiry,  whether  we  have  God's  per- 
mission to  do,  what  he  has  neither  commanded  nor  forbidden 
us  ? 

Suppose  the  present  incumbent  of  the  chair  of  the  Presidency 
of  the  United  States  was  able  to  make  himself  a  dictator  or 
emperor  ;  and  after  establishing  himself  in  power,  should  evi- 
dently aim  to  administer  his  government  so  as  to  command 
respect  and  secure  esteem,  as  one  of  the  greatest  benefactors  of 
his  race  ?  Could  it  be  said,  that  he  has  a  right  to  reign  over 
this  nation,  because  he  does  reign;  or  because  civil  govern- 
ment is  of  divine  authority  ?  And  if  his  adherents  should  ap- 
peal to  the  Scriptures,  to  support  his  despotism — in  opposition  to 
the  right  of  the  people  to  rule  themselves — would  it  be  enough 
for  them  to  say,  "  The  powers  that  be,  are  ordained  of  God  ?  " 

We  may  concede,  that  the  relation  of  a  master  to  his  slave 
may  not  always  imply  guilt  in  the  master.  But  the  right 
which  is  assumed  to  belong  to  him,  by  that  relation,  we  utterly 
deny.  Neither  are  we  required,  if  allowed,  in  our  moral  esti- 
mate of  slavery,  to  separate  the  relation  from  its  accidents  or 
incidents,  as  they  may  be  called ;  and  which  are  at  present 
associated  with  the  right,  as  claimed  and  exercised,  hardly  less 
intimately  and  invariably,  than  if  inseparable  properties,  or,  at 
least,  unavoidable  accompaniments. 

And  besides,  if  fully  granted,  that  personal  slave-holding,  as 
distinguished  from  slavery,  does  not  always  imply  guilt,  we  are 
entirely  sure,  that  no  slave-holder  can  be  safe  in  assuming  or 
presuming  that  he  himself  is  without  sin.  It  is  a  perilous  con- 


Biblical  Repertory,  Jan.  1849,  Art. 


16 

elusion,  that  there  is  sin  in  no  case,  because  in  some  cases 
there  may  be  none. 

After  God  had  created  the  founders  of  the  race,  "  he  blessed 
them,  and  said  unto  them,  be  fruitful  and  multiply  and.  replen- 
ish the  earth  and  subdue  it :  and  have  dominion  over  the  fish 
of  the  sea,  and  over  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  over  every  living 
thing  that  moveth  upon  the  earth.  And  God  said,  Behold  I 
have  given  you  every  herb  bearing  seed,  which  is  upon  the 
face  of  all  the  earth,  and  every  tree,  in  the  which  is  the  fruit  of 
a  tree  yielding  seed  ;  to  you  it  shall  be  for  meat."  Can  the  re- 
lation of  master  and  slave,  or  the  right  of  slave-holding,  be  found 
in  this  ordinance  ?  And,  moreover,  it  may  be  asked  with  much 
emphasis,  How  can  slaves  fulfill  the  purposes  of  this  ordinance, 
according  to  its  unquestionable  import,  both  in  respect  to  duty 
arid  privilege,  in  extending  the  domain  of  an  enlightened  and 
progressive  civilization  ? 

When  Noah  and  his  family  came  forth  from  the  ark,  God 
said  unto  them,  "  Be  fruitful  and  multiply  and  replenish  the 
earth.  And  the  fear  of  yon  and  the  dread  of  you,  shall  be  upon 
every  beast  of  the  earth,  and  upon  every  fowl  of  the  air,  upon 
all  that  moveth  upon  the  earth,  and  upon  all  the  fishes  of  the 
sea  ;  into  your  hand  are  they  delivered.  Every  moving  thing 
that  liveth  shall  be  meat  for  you  ;  even  as  the  green  herb  have 
I  given  you  all  things."  The  right  to  use  animals  as  "  the 
green  herb  "  for  human  sustenance,  is  the  only  additional  right 
which  God  gave  to  Noah  and  his  sons.  The  right  of  slave- 
holding  is  not  in  this  ordinance,  any  more  than  in  that  delivered 
to  Adam. 

The  original  grant  of  property  and  dominion  to  the  human 
race,  is  gratefully  celebrated  in  the  Psalms.  (Ps.  viii.)  It  is 
also  introduced  into  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  in  a  direct 
citation  of  the  words  of  David.  (Ch.  ii.)  But  in  neither  case 
is  there  the  least  allusion  to  any  such  power  or  property,  as  that 
which  is  claimed  as  the  right  of  a  master,  in  respect  to  his 
slave. 

If  now  such  power  or  property  has  not  been  granted  in  either 
of  those  two  great  comprehensive  ordinances  of  the  Most  High, 
— where  else  in  the  holy  Scriptures,  which  are  the  Magna  and 
the  Maxima  Charta  of  human  rights  and  privileges,  can  the 
right  of  slave-holding  be  found  ? 

The  first  allusion  to  slavery,  whether  personal  or  political,  is 
in  the  language  of  Noah,  when,  by  a  prophetic  malediction,  he 
so  memorably  rebuked  the  offence  of  Ham.  "  Cursed  be  Ca- 
naan j  a  servant  of  servants  shall  he  be  unto  his  brethren." 
These  words  of  the  father,  but  not  the  law-giver  of  all  existing 
nations  and  families,  have  sometimes  been  most  singularly  mis- 
understood, or  inexcusably  perverted.  In  connection  or  con- 


17 

trast  with  the  blessing  upon  Shem  and  Japheth,  they  have  been 
explained,  as  if  Noah  instituted  slavery,  and  by  divine  direction 
gave  liberty  to  a  part  of  his  descendants,  to  enslave  another 
part,  throughout  all  generations.  And  by  assuming  that  the 
Africans  now  in  bondage  are  the  posterity  of  Canaan,  it  has 
been  maintained  by  some,  that  those  who  claim  them  as  their 
property,  and  use  them  at  their  will,  are  entirely  justified  by 
the  purpose  of  God.  It  has  actually  been  pretended,  that  the 
Supreme  Disposer  of  all  things  has  decreed  their  perpetual  ser- 
vitude, to  teach  the  world  the  duty  of  filial  reverence  and  of 
civil  obedience  ! 

Such  pretensions  are  too  preposterous  for  sober  denial.  They 
involve  absurdity  upon  absurdity,  most  palpable  and  most 
flagrant.  It  might  just  as  rationally  be  maintained,  that  Noah 
gave  plenary  indulgence  to  excess  of  wine  and  to  drunkenness, 
in  all  ages  to  the  end  of  the  world.  Moreover,  aH  right  and 
wrong,  all  good  and  evil  would  become  conventional  and  con- 
vertible names,  or  be  mere  distinctions  without  differences,  if 
the  words  of  prophecy  were  to  be  construed  as  justifying  that 
mode  of  conduct,  which,  under  divine  control,  ensures  fulfil- 
ment, according  to  "  the  foreknowledge  and  determinate  coun- 
sel of  God."  It  could  never  have  been,  as  it  was,  "  with  wick- 
ed hands,"  that  "  the  Holy  One  and  the  Just  "  "  was  crucified 
and  slain."  And  never  could  it  have  been  said  :  "  Truly  the 
Son  of  Man  goeth  as  it  was  determined  :  but  wo  unto  that  man 
by  whom  he  is  betrayed !  " 

The  predictions  of  the  prophets,  and  divine  purposes,  so  far 
as  made  known,  may  be  employed  as  encouragements  to  good 
and  as  dissuasives  from  evil.  But  it  is  in  the  precepts,  or  re- 
quirements of  God,  not  in  his  purposes,  nor  in  predictions,  that 
we  have  the  rule  of  duty  and  the  standard  of  rectitude.  Hence 
the  language  of  Noah,  when,  by  an  inspired  foreknowledge  of 
the  calamitous  condition  of  the  guilty  and  polluted  Canaanites, 
he  spoke  as  he  did,  in  signal  reproof  of  filial  dishonor,  furnished 
not  the  slightest  warrant  for  the  posterity  of  Shem  and  Japheth 
with  all  the  other  sons  of  Ham  alsoj  to  enslave  them,  or  in  any 
way  to  oppress  them.  The  prediction  of  the  bondage  of  the 
Hebrews  in  Egypt,  who  were  of  the  descendants  of  Shem,  was 
just  as  fully  a  divine  warrant  to  Pharaoh,  to  "  set  task  masters 
over  them,"  and  "make  their  lives  bitter  with  hard  bondage, 
in  mortar  and  in  brick,  and  in  all  manner  of  service  in  the 
field." 

There  is  no  apology  for  any  mistake,  as  it  regards  the  na- 
tional identity  of  the  descendants  of  Canaan.  It  is  written  in 
the  Scriptures,  that  "Canaan  begat  Sidon  his  first-born,  and 
Heth,  and  the  Jebusite,  and  the  Amorite,  and  the  Girgasite,  and 
the  Hivite,  and  the  Arkite,  and  the  Sinite,  and  the  Arvadite, 
3 


18 

and  the  Zemarite,  and  the  Hamathite ;  and  afterward  were 
the  families  of  the  Canaanites  spread  abroad.  And  the  border 
of  the  Canaanites  was  from  Sidon,  as  thou  comest  to  Gerar, 
unto  Gaza;  as  thou  goest  unto  Sodom,  and  Gomorrah,  and 
Admah,  and  Zeboim,  even  unto  Lasha."  (Gen.  x.  15-19. 
Comp.  1  Chron.  i.  13-16.) 

As  a  race  of  men,  they  had  become  exceedingly  corrupt,  in 
the  age  when  the  Hebrews  were  led  out  of  Egypt,  to  take  pos- 
session of  the  land,  which  had  been  promised  to  Abraham  and 
his  seed.  "  The  land,"  said  the  voice  of  God  to  Moses,  "  is 
defiled:  therefore  I  do  visit  the  iniquity  thereof  upon  it,  and 
the  land  itself  vomiteth  out  her  inhabitants."  (Lev.  xviii.  25.) 
It  is  not  for  any  one  to  say,  that  this  iniquity  had  no  connection 
with  the  vile  character  of  Ham,  or  of  Canaan,  who  may  have 
been  a  direct  partaker  of  the  sin,  which  indicated  such  ungod- 
liness and  uncleanness.  There  may  have  been  also  some  spe- 
cial design  in  the  record  of  the  curse  upon  Canaan,  born  for  the 
instruction  and  admonition  of  the  chosen  people  ;  as  they  were 
then  marching  towards  the  country  of  the  Canaanites,  under 
the  most  solemn  command  to  exterminate  them.  As  the  twelve 
tribes  then  were,  and  as  the  world  was,  through  the  abounding 
prevalence  of  idolatry,  such  signal  inflictions  of  divine  displeas- 
ure as  they  were  called  to  witness,  would  appear  to  have  been 
indispensable  to  convey  to  their  minds  a  distinct  and  salutary 
perception  of  divine  holiness  and  justice,  and  the  consequent 
demerit  of  sin. 

But  there  is  no  intimation  that  the  Hebrews  had  their  right 
to  the  land  in  consequence  of  the  curse  of  Noah,  or  that  the 
woes  which  God  had  determined  to  inflict,  were  retrospectively 
and  primarily  to  be  considered  a  visitation  of  the  iniquity  of  the 
fathers  upon  the  children.  It  was  most  evidently  for  their  own 
wickedness  that  the  Canaanites  were  doomed  to  such  a  punish- 
ment, in  the  sight  of  all  nations.  For  any  thing  that  is  written, 
therefore,  or  is  fairly  implied  to  the  contrary,  we  must  regard 
the  offence  of  their  progenitor,  or  progenitors,  not  as  the  cause 
of  their  punishment,  but  as*  the  occasion  of  Us  being  foretold. 
And  the  manner  in  which  it  was  foretold,  would  naturally  be 
a  most  humiliating  rebuke  to  the  offender,  and  a  fearful  warn- 
ing to  his  posterity. 

It  is  thus,  that  we  interpret  the  offence  of  Hezekiah,  and 
the  judgment  which  was  denounced,  when  he  displayed  his 
treasures  to  the  messengers  of  the  king  of  Babylon.  His  in- 
discretion and  his  pride  were  the  occasion  of  the  prophecy, 
but  not  the  cause  of  the  future  sorrows  of  his  children  and  his 
people. 

In  further  confirmation  of  this  view  of  the  nature  of  the 
curse  of  Noah  upon  Canaan,  we  may  cite  the  example  of  Jacob, 


19 

in  his  dying  rebuke  of  Simeon  and  Levi : — "  Cursed  be  their 
anger,  for  it  was  fierce  :  and  their  wrath,  for  it  was  cruel :  I 
will  divide  them  in  Jacob,  and  scatter  them  in  Israel."  In  the 
actual  result,  the  sons  of  Levi,  although  "  scattered  in  Israel," 
were  recompensed  for  their  pre-eminent  faithfulness,  (Ex.  xxxii.) 
and  exalted  to  the  highest  distinction  of  office  and  privilege. 
And  the  tribe  of  Simeon  appears  in  history,  under  no  marked 
disadvantages  or  reproaches,  as  compared  with  the  other  tribes  ; 
although  "  their  inheritance  was  within  the  inheritance  of  the 
children  of  Judah."  (Josh,  xix.)  It  is  obvious  then  that  such 
a  malediction  as  that  of  Noah,  did  not  in  any  way  determine, 
either  the  calamitous  condition  or  the  detestable  character  of 
those  who  were  lineally  designated  as  the  sufferers. 

We  are  not  to  suppose  that  they  were  sinners  above  all  men, 
or  that  the  calamities  which  came  upon  them  were  unparallel- 
ed and  unequalled.  In  the  days  of  Abraham,  before  "  the 
iniquity  of  the  Amorites "  was  "full,"  (Gen.  xv.  16.)  there 
were  such  men  in  the  land  as  Abimelech  of  Gerar,  and  Mel- 
chizedek  of  Salem.  The  latter,  certainly,  must  be  numbered 
among  the  most  "excellent,"  who  have  ever  appeared  "  in  the 
earth."  He  "  received  tithes  of  Abraham  and  blessed  him  that 
had  the  promises.  And  without  all  contradiction,  the  less  is 
blessed  of  the  better." 

The  "seven  nations  "  in  Canaan  were  not  wholly  destroyed. 
"  The  Lord  thy  God,"  it  was  written,  "  will  put  out  those  na- 
tions before  thee  by  little  and  little  :  thou  mayest  not  consume 
them  at  once,  lest  the  beast  of  the  field  increase  upon  thee." 
(Deut.  vii.  22.)  The  Jebusites  held  possession  of  a  fortified 
eminence  at  Salem,  or  Jerusalem,  until  overpowered  by  David. 
And  when  Solomon  needed  a  kind  of  labor,  in  erecting  the 
temple,  which  he  either  was  unable  or  unwilling  to  exact  of 
his  own  people,  he  saw  fit  to  "  levy  a  tribute  of  bond-service  " 
upon  "  the  children  that  were  left  in  the  land,"  "  of  the 
Amorites,  Hittites,  Perjzzites,  Hivites  and  Jebusites."  (1  Kings 
ix.) 

Powerful  nations,  also,  were  of  the  same  immediate  family 
origin,  as  those  that  were  subjugated  by  the  Hebrews.  They 
had  many  slaves,  and  some  of  them  "  traded  the  persons  of 
men,"  as  they  did  "  vessels  of  brass"  (Ezek.  xxvii.  13.)  Such 
were  the  Syrians  of  Hamath,  with  a  capital  city  rivalling  Da- 
mascus ;  the  Sidonians  and  Tyrians  and  the  Phoenicians,  so 
skilled  in  arts,  so  adventurous  in  commerce  and  colonization  ; 
and  the  Carthaginians,  who,  but  for  an  oversight  in  their  victo- 
rious Hannibal,  might  have  dictated  laws  to  Rome,  and  -per- 
chance to  the  known  world. 

All  these,  however,  were  in  process  of  time  subjected  to  na- 
tions yet  more  powerful,  or  more  successful  in  war ;  and  were 


20 

made  to  experience  the  severest  forms  of  political  servitude. 
Many  among  them  were  carried  into  captivity  by  their  con- 
querors. A  part  or  all  were  reduced,  as  we  cannot  doubt,  to  the 
lowest  and  most  wretched  condition  of  personal  slavery.  Thus 
in  Palestine  and  out  of  Palestine,  the  prediction  of  Noah  had  a 
most  ample  fulfilment,  long  before  ancient  history  had  reached 
its  last  chapter. 

And  is  it  now  to  be  seriously  maintained,  that  Africans  can 
be  enslaved  by  Divine  permission,  in  consequence  of  the 
"curse"  pronounced  upon  Canaan,  four  thousand  years  ago  ? 
Let  it  first  be  shown,  that  any  of  them  are  Canaanites !  It 
would  be  impossible  to  prove  their  descent  from  either  of  the 
sons  of  Ham.  The  Egyptians,  as  is  indicated  by  their  ancient 
name,  may  have  been  so  descended.  The  colored  race  are 
quite  as  probably  from  Shem,  if  not  from  Japheth.  And  the 
Egyptians,  with  all  the  changes  that  have  passed  over  them, 
have  been  slave-holders  from  the  remotest  antiquity. 

There  has  been  far  too  much  taken  for  granted,  in  what  has 
been  so  often  repeated  concerning  an  alleged  division  of  the 
earth  by  Noah,  soon  after  the  waters  of  the  flood  had  retired. 
An  apportionment  of  Africa  to  Ham,  of  Europe  to  Japheth,  and 
of  Asia  to  Shem,  is  all  a  fiction  on  the  very  face  of  it  ;  and 
none  the  less  ridiculous,  from  the  imposing  gravity  with  which 
it  has  been  taught,  as  if  an  axiom  of  geographical  science. 
We  have  an  authentic  memorial  of  "  a  division  of  the  earth," 
so  called,  which  took  place  in  the  days  of  Peleg  ;  or  rather, 
perhaps,  more  strictly  speaking,  in  the  days  of  Eber,  his  father, 
who  may  be  understood  to  have  given  the  name,  as  a  significant 
token  of  the  event.  Peleg  was  in  the  sixth  generation  from 
Noah.  Not  far  from  the  time  of  his  birth,  probably,  there  ap- 
pears to  have  been  a  convention  of  the  leaders  of  different  fam- 
ilies, and  an  amicable  distribution  and  settlement  of  territorial 
limits.  It  was  a  great  event  for  the  times.  We  may  suppose 
it  to  have  been  peculiarly  interesting  to  the  Hebrews,  from  their 
ancestral  relationship  ;  and  thus  to  have  been  specially  noted  in 
their  genealogical  tables.  But  no  one,  who  has  studied  the 
Scriptures  intelligently,  needs  to  be  informed,  that  "  the  earth" 
does  not  always  mean  all  of  it,  or  even  a  hundredth  part  of  it. 
And  we  have  no  more  reliable  evidence  of  any  personal  appor- 
tionment of  the  three  great  divisions  of  the  eastern  hemisphere, 
between  the  three  sons  of  Noah,  or  their  descendants  respec- 
tively, at  any  period  whatever,  than  for  the  very  learned  and 
discriminating  hypothesis,  which  has  attributed  the  sable  com- 
plexion of  the  negro  to  the  mark  of  Cain,  and  hence  deduced 
an  argument  for  African  enslavement ! 

In  truth  and  soberness,  it  may  be  affirmed,  that  the  whitest 
slave-holder  of  modern  Christendom  is  as  likely  to  have  the 


21 

blood  of  Ham  or  of  Canaan  in  his  veins,  as  is  any  one,  who, 
of  all  his  slaves,  may  be  the  most 

"  guilty  of  a  skin 
Not  colour' d  like  his  own ;  and    * 

*         *         *         *        for  such  a  worthy  cause 
Doomed  and  devoted    *     *    as  his  lawful  prey." 

With  no  more  success,  and  with  scarcely  less  of  propriety, 
would  a  serious  attempt  be  made,  to  identify  the  Congoes  or 
any  tribe  of  Africa,  with  Cain,  the  son  of  Adam,  than  with 
Canaan,  the  son  of  Ham  ! 

We  have  before  remarked,  that  the  first  allusion  in  the  Scrip- 
tures to  the  subject  of  slavery,  is  found  in  that  prophetic  maledic- 
tion. But  the  language  of  Noah  would  have  been  unintelligible, 
and  therefore  without  effect  as  a  rebuke  for  the  offence,  which 
was  the  occasion  of  its  being  uttered,  if  both  he  and  his  sons  had 
not  known  of  the  existence  of  some  mode  of  servitude,  previ- 
ous to  the  deluge.  Who,  then,  it  may  be  asked,  were,  in  all 
probability,  the  first  slave-holders?  Were  they  of  Seth  and 
Enoch,  the  ancestors  of  Noah  ?  Among  whom  would  slavery 
have  begun  so  naturally,  as  among  the  descendants  of  him, 
whose  hands  were  crimsoned  with  the  fraternal  blood  of  right- 
eous Abel  ?  It  certainly  did  not  commence  with  the  curse  of 
Noah.  And  whence  did  it  come,  but  from  that  "corruption" 
which  so  dreadfully  abounded,  when  "  the  earth  was  filled 
with  violence  ; "  "  and  it  repented  the  Lord  that  he  had  made 
man  on  the  earth,  and  it  grieved  him  at  his  heart  ?  "  Whence 
also  came  polygamy  and  divorce  ? 

The  same  essential  spirit  of  "corruption"  and  "violence" 
was  manifested  among  the  descendants  of  Noah,  before  the 
living  witnesses  of  the  deluge  could  have  ceased  from  the 
earth.  And  if  the  truth  could  be  known,  we  have  little  doubt, 
that  the  first  or  the  most  responsible  name  for  example  and  author- 
ity, in  the  reappearance  of  the  custom' or  institution,  would  be 
that  of  Nimrod,  a  grandson  of  Ham,  who  "  began  to  be  a  mighty 
one  in  the  earth,"  and  was  the  prototype  of  all  the  Nebuchad- 
nezzars  and  Napoleons,  great  and  small,  that  have  since  arisen, 
to  scourge  their  fellow  men. 

He  is  said  to  have  been  "  a  mighty  hunter  before  the  Lord; 
and  the  beginning  of  his  kingdom  was  Babel,  and  Erech,  arid 
Accad,  and  Calneh,  in  the  land  of  Shinar."  (Gen.  x.  9,  10.) 
His  name  is  from  a  Hebrew  word,  which  signifies  "  to  be  diso- 
bedient, perverse,  to  rebel."  And  the  Targum,  on  1  Chron.  i. 
10,  as  quoted  in  a  modern  commentary,  says  of  him, — "  Nim- 
rod began  to  be  a  mighty  man  in  sin,  a  murderer  of  innocent 
men,  and  a  rebel  before  the  Lord."  The  Jerusalem  Targum 
says,  "  He  was  mighty  in  hunting,  (or  in  prey,)  and  in  sin  be- 
fore God  ;  for  he  was  a  hunter  of  the  children  of  men  in  their 
3* 


22 

languages ;  and  he  said  unto  them,  Depart  from  the  religion 
of  Shem  ;  and  cleave  to  the  institutes  of  Nimrod."  The  same 
view  is  taken  of  him,  in  other  ancient  commentaries.  "  And 
the  word,  which  we  render  hunter"  says  one  of  the  most  learn- 
ed of  English  expositors,  "  signifies  prey,  and  is  applied  in  the 
Scriptures  to  the  hunting  of  men,  by  persecution,  oppression 
and  tyranny.  See  Jer.  xvi.  16  ;  Lam.  iii.  52  ;  Prov.  i.  17,  18  ; 
Zeph.  iii.  6.  Hence  it  is  likely,  that  Nimrod,  having  acquired 
power,  used  it  in  tyranny  and  oppression." 

As  men  departed  from  the  worship  of  the  true  God,  they  appear 
to  have  also  departed  from  love  to  one  another.  Practices  and 
customs  were  introduced  and  established,  which  were  too  con- 
genial to  their  selfish  passions  and  propensities,  not  to  be  exten- 
sively adopted  by  those,  who  had  the  power  and  the  opportunity. 
As  idolatry  prevailed,  man  would  depreciate  in  the  estimation 
of  his  fellow  man,  and  no  just  ideas  of  his  standing  and  his 
worth,  as  "  made  after  the  similitude  of  God,"  would  have 
influence  or  even  be  conceived,  but  in  very  small  measure  and 
within  very  narrow  limits. 

In  such  a  state  of  society,  if  society  it  can  be  called,  which, 
in  the  early  ages  after  the  deluge,  existed  in  the  countries 
watered  by  the  Euphrates  and  the  Tigris,  it  is  not  surprising, 
that  taptives  in  war  should  have  been  held  in  bondage  ;  and 
that  the  rank  of  the  mighty  or  the  opulent  should  be  estimated 
in  part  by  the  number  of  their  men-servants  and  maid-servants. 
Neither  is  it  at  all  unaccountable,  that  men  who  "  feared  God," 
"and  through  faith,  wrought  righteousness,"  like  Abraham  and 
Job,  should  have  so  far  conformed,  as  it  would  seem  that  they 
did,  to  what  appears  to  have  been  the  universal  custom,  in  the 
larger  households  of  Mesopotamia,  Arabia,  Egypt,  and  all  other 
lands,  during  the  age  which,  is  commonly  known  as  the  patri- 
archal. 

The  Man  of  Uz  "  was  the  greatest  of  all  the  men  of  the  east." 
Whether  the  men-servants  and  maid-servants  of  his  "  very 
great  household,"  were  slaves,  it  might  not  be  found  easy 
to  show  by  such  kind  of  proof,  as  would  be  demanded  by  the 
rules  of  legal  evidence.  The  original  terms,  like  our  own  word 
"  serva?it"  may  or  may  not  have  denoted  bond-men  and  bond- 
maids. Bat  all  the  circumstances  render  it  highly  probable, 
that  very  many  in  his  household  were  "  bought  with  his  mon- 
ey," or  were  "  born  in  his  house,"  as  were  the  servants  of 
Abraham,  and  were  held  by  him  as  a  part  of  his  estate,  some- 
what as  the  serfs  of  Russia  and  Poland,  or  as  those  in  servile 
tenure  under  the  feudal  law  of  the  Middle  Ages,  who  might  be 
"  annexed  to  the  manor,"  or  might  be  "  annexed  to  the  person 
of  their  lord,  and  be  transferable  from  one  to  another."  Of  hib 
feelings  towards  them,  his  recognition  of  their  natural  rights, 


23 

and  his  conscientious  endeavors  to  treat  them,  as  a  man  .who 
would  always  "  do  justly,  love  mercy,  and  walk  humbly  with 
God," — a  most  honorable  testimony  has  been  recorded,  as  if 
none  could  have  the  effrontery  to  gainsay  it,  although  the  lan- 
guage of  his  own  lips  :  "  If  I  did  despise  the  cause  of  my  man- 
servant or  of  my  maid-servant,  when  they  contended  with  me  ; 
what  then  shall  I  do  when  God  riseth  up?  And  when  he  vis- 
iteth,  what  shall  I  answer  him?  DID  NOT  HE  THAT  MADE  ME  IN 

THE   WOMB   MAKE   HIM?       AND  DID  NOT  ONE     FASHION     US     IN     THE 

WOMB?"     (Job  xxxi.  13-15.) 

The  mode  of  life  of  the  Man  of  Uz  may  be  very  well  illus- 
trated, by  that  which  is  still  seen  in  that  of  a  rich  and  power- 
ful Arabic  Emir  or  Sheik.  It  was,  doubtless,  intermediate  be- 
tween the  nomadic  pastoral  life,  and  the  settled  manner  of  or- 
ganized communities  like  ours.  Very  much  the  same  was  that 
of  Abraham,  who  may  have  lived  before  him,  or,  as  is  quite 
probable,  in  the  same  age. 

Some  of  the  servants  of  the  patriarch,  perhaps  the  most,  were 
received  as  presents ;  as  those  given  him  by  Pharaoh  and 
Abimelech.  (Gen.  xii.  16  ;  xx.  14.)  Many  were  "  born  in  his 
house."  But  a  part  may  have  been  "  bought  with  his  money." 
(Gen.  xviii.  13.)  Whether  any  of  these  were  bought  of  third 
persons,  who  were  traffickers  in  men,  as  merchandise,  is  much 
doubted  by  some,  and  is  denied  by  others,  who,  on  the  con- 
trary, believe  that  he  bought  none,  except  by  their  own  choice, 
or  for  their  own  benefit.  That  any  of  the  patriarchs  ever  sold 
any  of  their  servants,  does  riot  appear  at  all  probable,  from  any 
thing  which  is  found  in  their  history. 

During  the  great  famine  in  the  days  of  Joseph,  a  multitude 
of  the  Egyptians  were  glad  to  sell  their  lands  and  themselves 
for  bread. 

In  those  early  times  of  lawlessness  and  rapine,  the  poor  and 
defenceless  among  the  nomadic  and  idolatrous  tribes  of  Pales- 
tine and  Arabia,  would  often  find  the  temptation  very  strong  to 
seek  refuge  in  a  home  like  Abraham's.  The  personal  liberty 
surrendered  might  be  much  less  than  the  value  received.  The 
price  paid  might  be  more  a  gratuity  than  a  compensation.  In 
our  own  country  it  is  undoubtedly  true,  that  slaves  have  some- 
times been  purchased  in  mercy  to  them  ;  and  not  in  the  least 
for  the  advantage  of  the  purchaser.  And  emancipated  slaves, 
who  have  not  known  how  to  use  their  freedom  "  as  not  abus- 
ing it,"  or  who  have  been  disappointed  in  their  hopes,  have 
sometimes  returned  to  their  master,  and  implored  him  to  receive 
them  again,  and  permit  them  to  be  as  they  were  before  he  gave 
them  their  liberty. 

The  comparative  state  of  the  bond  and  the  free,  in  respect  to 
means  of  improvement  and  enjoyment,  nineteen  centuries  be- 


24 

/ore  .Christ,  must  not,  in  the  nineteenth  century  after  Christ, 
be  summarily  decided  by  our  own  conception  of  the  value  of 
personal  liberty,  or  by  the  common  acceptation  of  the  terms 
"  bond,"  and  "/ree,"  in  the  languages  and  literature  of  the 
most  enlightened  Christian  nations. 

That  which  costs  money,  is  not  always  money,  either  in 
name  or  reality.  A  right  of  property  may  be  claimed  in  the 
labor  or  service  of  a  fellow-man  ;  and  his  service  may  have  the 
form  and  designation  of  bond-service  ;  while  yet  he  is  not  re- 
garded as  "  goods  or  chattels,"  or  as  "a  beast  of  burden,"  but 
as  truly  a  maw,  in  whom  is  "the  spirit  that  goeth  upward," 
and  not  "  the  spirit  of  the  beast  that  goeth  downward  to  the 
earth." 

What  we  know  of  Abraham's  religious  care  of  his  household, 
forbids  us  to  believe,  that  he  could  ever  have  looked  upon  any 
of  his  servants,  as  if  mere  things,  or  as  like  "the  brutes  that 
perish."  They  shared  in  all  his  religious  privileges.  They 
received  the  same  seal  of  the  covenant  of  promise.  They  were 
members  of  his  family.  He  could  confide  in  them,  and  trust 
arms  in  their  hands,  as  if  his  own  children.  One  was  the 
steward  of  his  house,  and  for  a  time  was  the  heir  apparent  to 
the  whole  estate.  Another  was  brought  into  a  relation,  which 
was  accounted  by  himself  and  others,  as  next  to  the  nearest. 

With  such  facts  as  these  before  us,  how  can  we  doubt,  that 
Abraham  could  have  responded  most  cordially  to  the  words  of 
the  Man  of  Uz :  "  Did  not  he  that  made  me  in  the  womb  make 
him?  and  did  not  one  fashion  us  ?  "  As  he  considered  the  lia- 
bilities of  bond-servants  among  idolaters,  he  might  also  have 
responded  to  those  other  words,  from  the  same  lips,  when  the 
grave  was  so  fervently  desired, — as  the  place,  "  where  the 
wicked  cease  from  troubling,  and  the  weary  be  at  rest  ;  the 
prisoners  rest  together ;  they  hear  not  the  voice  of  the  oppres- 
sor. The  small  and  the  great  are  there  ;  and  the  servant  is 
free  from  his  master."  (Job  iii.  17-19.) 

But  what  now  if  God,  who  "  see4h  the  end  from  the  begin- 
ning," and  has  adapted  his  moral  government  to  men,  as  they 
are  in  their  imperfections,  errors  and  sins,  was  pleased  to  enter 
into  covenant  with  Abraham,  recognizing  his  existing  relations 
to  his  household,  without  forbidding  the  continuance  of  any  of 
them  ;  what  if  that  covenant  of  promise,  while  extending  for- 
ward and  expanding  through  all  coming  time,  was  announced 
in  terms  and  with  provisions,  which  were  exactly  suited  to 
affect,  in  the  happiest  manner,  those  existing  relations  ;  suppose 
also,  that  those  terms  and  provisions  were  in  direct  anticipation 
of  that  peculiar  state  of  things,  in  which  Abraham's  descend- 
ants were  led  out  of  Egypt,  to  form  and  sustain  a  theocratic 
commonwealth, — is  it  a  just  or  safe  conclusion,  that  all  those 


relations  of  the  patriarch  may  be  considered  right,  in  all  cir- 
cumstances, and  agreeable  to  the  divine  will,  among  all  nations 
and  in  all  ages  ?  And  if  Abraham  could  have  "  washed  his 
hands  in  innocency,"  are  modern  slave-holders  to  feel  that  they 
can  do  likewise  ? 

Who  will  contend,  that  the  patriarchal  system,  in  any  of  its 
distinctive  features,  was  designed  to  be  permanent  ?  And  can 
the  example  of  the  patriarchs,  in  the  matter  of  bond-service,  be 
any  more  a  direction  of  duty,  or  a  sanction  of  allowance  to  us, 
as  Christians  or  as  citizens,  than  their  example  in  the  relations 
of  marriage  ?  Would  it  be  Christian,  would  it  be  right — if  not 
prohibited  by  the  laws  of  the  land, — for  a  man  now  to  take 
more  wives  than  one,  and  as  many  as  he  should  please  ?  And 
where  is  the  record  or  the  proof  of  any  intimation  to  the  patri- 
archs, that  bond-service  is  any  more  consistent  with  the  natural 
rights  of  man,  and  the  highest  good  of  the  race,  than  polygamy 
or  concubinage  is,  with  the  original  constitution  of  family 
order  ?  The  most,  as  it  appears  to  us,  that  can  be  made  of 
bond-service  in  the  families  of  the  patriarchs,  as  a  precedent  or 
apology  for  modern  slave-holding,  is,  that  the  relation  of  master 
and  slave  may  not  be  always,  and  in  all  imaginable  circum- 
stances, an  actual  wrong,  or  a  real  sin. 

In  regard  to  slavery,  as  found  among  the  Hebrews,  after  the 
giving  of  the  law,  it  is  of  great  importance  to  bear  in  mind 
what  has  been  already  suggested,  respecting  the  universal  pre- 
valence of  the  custom  or  institution.  So  far  as  can  be  ascer- 
tained, there  had  as  yet  been  no  ordinance  in  any  kingdom-or 
state,  abolishing  or  restricting  it.  "Every  man  did  that 
which  was  right  in  his  own  eyes." 

Moses  found  his  brethren  slave-holders,  as  well  as  themselves 
in  hard  bondage  to  the  Egyptians.  (Ex.  xii.  44.)  If,  then, 
slavery  was  not  entirely  prohibited,  any  more  than  polygamy 
and  divorce  at  will,  by  the  statutes  of  the  Hebrew  common- 
wealth, can  it  be  said,  that  it  was  so  authorized  as  to  warrant 
slave-holding  in  Christian  America?  We  believe  not. 

In  each  of  the  two  tables  of  the  moral  law,  there  is  a  specific 
reference  to  men-servants  and  maid-servants.  The  terms  are 
such  as  would  have  a  full  signification,  if  no  bond-servants  had 
been  allowed  in  Israel.  We  must  suppose,  however,  that  ser- 
vants of  this  class  were  really  contemplated,  and  for  reasons 
which  illustrate  the  righteous  and  beneficent  character  of  the 
fundamental  principles  of  the  sacred  code  of  God's  covenant 
people. 

The  Ten  Commandments,  although  containing  the  essential 
rules  of  moral  duty,  which  are  applicable  to  all  the  race,  to  the 
end  of  time,  were  yet  given  in  a  form  of  words,  specifically 


26 

adapted  to  the  state  of  the  Israelites,  in  things  peculiar.  Wit- 
ness, for  instance,  the  promise  annexed  to  the  fifth  command- 
ment. And  now  whether  the  references  to  men-servants  and 
maid-servants,  are  to  be  understood  as  intimating  or  pre-sup- 
posing  the  perpetual  lawfulness  of  bond-service,  either  among 
the  chosen  seed  of  Abraham,  or  among  the  Gentiles,  who  in 
Christ  are  "  Abraham's  seed,"  is  a  question,  which  we  would 
neither  attempt  to  evade,  nor  hastily  and  summarily  to  decide. 

It  is  worthy  of  special  attention,  that,  among  the  very  first 
articles  of  the  Mosaic  code,  after  the  record  of  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments, we  find  the  statutes  or  ordinances  which  protected 
every  Hebrew  against  the  liabilities  of  bond-service.  And  it  is 
also,  perhaps,  worthy  of  still  more  special  attention,  that  for  a 
Hebrew  to  "  steal  "  one  of  his  brethren,  or  to  "make  merchan- 
dise of  him,"  or  to  "  sell  him,"  was  a  crime  of  the  greatest 
enormity,  and  in  all  circumstances  was  to  be  punished  with 
death.  (Ex.  xxi.  16;  Deut.  xxiv.  7.) 

Can  any  thing  less  be  inferred  from  such  statutes,  than  a  de- 
cisive testimony  of  a  holy  and  just  God,  to  the  inherent  dignity 
of  man,  and  the  natural  inviolability  of  his  person  ?  And  by 
the  ceremonial  part  of  the  Sabbath,  the  great  anniversary  fes- 
tivals, the  Sabbatical  or  seventh  year,  with  the  thrilling  scenes 
of  the  Jubilee  throughout  the  land,  in  the  fiftieth  year,  what 
less  could  have  been  intended,  than  a  most  instructive  and  im- 
pressive symbolization  of  the  priceless  liberty,  which  was  the 
birth-right  and  the  pledged  inheritance  of  those,  who  were 
"  servants  unto  God,"  and  "  not  in  bondage  to  any  man  ?  " 
"  For  unto  me,"  said  the  God  of  Abraham,  "the  children  of 
Israel  are  servants;  they  are  my  servants,  whom  I  brought 
forth  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt :  I  am  the  Lord  your  God !  " 
(Lev.  xxv.  55.) 

And  next  to  those  Ten  Commandments,  no  statutes  of  the  He- 
brew Lawgiver  were  written  in  such  capitals  of  effulgent  bright- 
ness, as  those  which  enjoin  an  unceasing  remembrance  of  the 
bondage  in  Egypt ;  that  all  the  people,  young  and  old  together, 
might  intelligently  and  most  gratefully  celebrate  the  glorious 
redemption,  which  had  been  achieved  for  them,  by  the  right 
arm  of  their  fathers'  God.  Witness  a  description  of  these,  in 
the  work  of  Josephus,  upon  the  "  Antiquities  of  the  Jews." — 
"  Let  every  one  commemorate  before  God  the  benefits  which 
he  bestowed  upon  them,  at  their  deliverance  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt;  and  this  twice  every  day,  both  when  the  day  begins 
and  when  the  hour  of  sleep  comes  on, — gratitude  being  in  its 
own  nature  a  just  thing,  and  serving  not  only  by  way  of  return 
for  past,  but  also  by  way  of  invitation  of  future  favors.  They 
are  also  to  inscribe  the  principal  blessings  they  have  received 
from  God  upon  the  doors,  and  show  the  same  remembrance  of 


27 

them  on  their  arms ;  as  also  they  are  to  bear  on  their  forehead, 
and  their  arm,  those  wonders  which  declare  the  power  of  God, 
and  his  good-will  towards  them,  that  God's  readiness  to  bless 
them  may  appear  every  where  conspicuous  about  them." 
(B.  iv.  C.  viii.  13.) 

The  Israelites  might  be  made  servants,  but  not  bond-men. 
(Lev.  xxv.  39.)  Six  years  was  the  longest  period,  in  which  a 
Hebrew  could  be  held  to  serve  any  of  his  brethren  of  the  seed 
of  Abraham,  unless  by  his  own  free  and  deliberate  choice. 
(Ex.  xxi.  2  ;  Deut.  xv.  12.)  Whether  he  became  a  servant 
by  the  sale  of  himself;  or  by  inability  to  pay  his  debts  ;  or  by 
being  sold  in  his  minority  by  his  poor  parents  ;  or  by  incurring 
the  penalty  of  theft,  or  some  other  crime  not  capital, — he  was 
always  to  be  treated  with  fraternal  kindness,  as  one  of  the  priv- 
ileged partakers  of  the  Lord's  covenant  with  their  great  progen- 
itor. And  when  his  term  of  service  "  as  a  hired  servant  and  as 
a  sojourner  "  had  expired,  he  was  to  be  discharged  with  valua- 
ble presents.  "  Thou  shalt  not  let  him  go  away  empty.  Thou 
shall  furnish  him  liberally  out  of  thy  flock,  and  out  of  thy 
floor,  and  out  of  thy  wine-press  ;  of  that  wherewith  the  Lord 
thy  God  hath  blessed  thee  thou  shalt  give  unto  him.  And  thou 
shalt  remember  that  thou  wast  a  bond-man  in  Egypt,  and  the 
Lord  thy  God  redeemed  thee;  therefore  I  command  thee  this 
thing  to-day."  (Lev.  xxv.  40;  Deut  xv.  12-15.) 

If  a  Hebrew  sold  himself,  in  his  penury  and  distress,  to  a 
rich  "sojourner  or  stranger  "  in  the  land, — the  law  of  his  pro- 
tection was  explicit :  "As  a  yearly  hired  servant  shall  he  be 
with  him  ;  and  the  other  shall  not  rule  with  rigor  over  him  in 
thy  sight."  (Lev.  xxv.  53.)  He  was  always  redeemable  by 
his  near  kindred  or  by  himself;  and  this  fact  implies  that  he 
might  hold  property  by  gift  or  inheritance,  and  that  only  his 
service  accrued  to  his  master.  If  not  redeemed  before  the 
year  of  Jubilee,  he  then  received  his  freedom,  with  all  others 
of  Hebrew  origin,  who  had  not  voluntarily  deprived  themselves 
of  their  appropriate  part  in  the  general  joy  of  emancipation. 

The  disobedience  of  the  statutes,  in  respect  to  the  rights  of 
Hebrew  servants,  to  their  liberty,  and  to  honorable  remunera- 
tion, at  the  end  of  six  years,  became,  in  the  days  of  Isaiah,  a 
most  aggravated  crime  of  the  people  in  Judah.  (Is.  Iviii.)  And 
in  the  days  of  Jeremiah,  the  same  disobedience  was  one  of  the 
procuring  causes  of  the  captivity  in  Babylon.  (Jer.  xxxiv.  12- 
17.)  But  no  inference  against  the  design  and  excellence  of  a 
law,  or  system  of  polity,  is  to  be  drawn  from  the  defiance  of 
transgressors  and  the  delinquency  of  magistrates. 

The  practical  sentiment  of  the  more  enlightened  and  philan- 
thropic among  the  people  of  God,  at  a  very  early  period  of  their 
residence  in  Palestine,  may  have  had  a  true  expression,  in  a 


later  age,  in  the  admirable  injunctions  of  the  son  of  Sirach  : 
"  Let  thy  sonl  love  a  good  servant,  and  defraud  him  not  of  his 
liberty."  "Unto  the  servant  that  is  wise  shall  they  that  are 
free  do  service  ;  and  he  that  hath  knowledge  will  not  grudge, 
when  he  is  reformed."  (Ecclus.  vii.  21  ;  x.  25.) 

In  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  an  army  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Ten 
Tribes  had  brought  back  from  an  invasion  of  Judah,  a  great 
multitude  of  captives,  for  the  purpose  of  making  them  bond- 
servants. As  the  conquerors  approached  Samaria,  with  the 
trophies  of  their  success,  they  met  with  an  indignant  and  ef- 
fectual repulse  from  "a  prophet  of  the  Lord,"  and  from  "  cer- 
tain of  the  heads  of  the  children  of  Ephraim."  "Ye  shall  not 
bring  in  the  captives  hither  ;  for  whereas  we  have  offended 
against  the  Lord  already,  ye  intend  to  add  more  to  our  sins  and 
to  our  trespass  :  for  our  trespass  is  great  and  there  is  fierce  wrath 
against  Israel.  So  the  armed  men  left  the  captives  and  the 
spoil  before  the  princes  and  all  the  congregation.  And  the 
men  which  were  expressed  by  name  rose  up  and  took  the  cap- 
tives, and  with  the  spoil  clothed  all  that  were  naked  among 
them,  and  arrayed  them,  and  shod  them,  and  gave  them  to  eat 
and  to  drink,  and  anointed  them,  and  carried  all  the  feeble  of 
them  upon  asses,  and  brought  them  to  Jericho,  the  city  of  palm 
trees,  to  their  brethren."  (2  Chron.  xxviii.) 

The  attempt  to  enslave  the  captives  of  Judah  might  be  sup- 
posed to  indicate  that  the  Hebrews  in  their  wars  with  heathen 
nations  were  accustomed  to  make  slaves  of  their  prisoners,  as 
was  the  ancient  practice,  according  to  the  generally  received 
rights  of  conquest.  To  some  extent  this  may  have  been  done. 
But  the  evidence  is  wanting, — except,  we  believe,  in  respect  to 
the  wars,  which  were  unavoidable  in  the  conquest  of  Canaan. 
A  part  only  of  the  Midianites,  who  had  signally  fallen  under 
the  Divine  displeasure,  were  permitted  to  live  ;  and  undoubtedly 
were  intended  for  maid-servants.  (Num.  xxxi.  15-18.  Comp. 
vs.  40.)  The  infidel  sarcasm  upon  the  proceeding  is  as  ground- 
less as  it  is  abominable. 

In  marching  to  the  land  of  promise,  the  Hebrews  were 
obliged  to  pass  through  territories  and  near  cities,  which  were 
not  given  them  for  possession  or  for  spoil ;  although  the  inhab- 
itants might  be  compelled  to  be  their  tributaries.  If  these 
would  submit  without  armed  resistance,  they  were  to  be  spared, 
and  both  their  persons  and  property  were  to  receive  no  violence. 
But  if  after  rejecting  the  "  proclamation  of  peace,"  they  were 
subdued,  all  the  males  were  devoted  to  destruction,  but  "  the 
women  and  the  little  ones  "  were  to  be  spared,  and  were  to  be 
considered  as  a  part  of  the  spoils.  (Deut.  xx.  10-14.)  But 
these  directions  seem  very  evidently  to  have  had  immediate 
respect  to  the  times,  in  which  they  were  given  j  and  to  have 


29 

been  occasioned  by  those  exigencies,  which  would  naturally 
cease,  after  the  people  of  Israel  had  become  settled  in  the  land, 
which  God  gave  to  their  fathers.  "  Thus  shall  thou  do,"  it  is 
said,  "  unto  all  the  cities  which  are  very  far  off  from  thee, 
which  are  not  of  the  cities  of  these  nations.  But  of  the  cities 
of  these  people,  which  the  Lord  thy  God  doth  give  thee  for 
an  inheritance,  thou  shall  save  alive  nothing  that  breatheth  : 
But  thou  shall  utterly  destroy  them,  namely,  the  Hittites  and 
the  Amorites,  the  Canaanites  and  the  Perizzites,  the  Hivites 
and  the  Jebusites,  as  the  Lord  thy  God  hath  commanded  thee  : 
That  they  teach  you  not  to  do  after  all  their  abominations, 
which  they  have  done  unto  their  gods ;  so  should  ye  sin  against 
the  Lord  your  God."  (Ueut.  xx.  15-18.) 

The  injunctions  to  the  Hebrews  concerning  the  manner  of 
conducting  a  siege  of  any  city  of  their  enemies,  and  the  treat- 
menl  of  female  captives,  were  very  far  from  that  spirit  of  ra- 
pine and  brutality,  which  have  been  common  in  wars,  both  an- 
cient and  modern.  (Deut.  xx.  19,  20;  xxi.  10-14.)  And  it 
may  be  noticed  as  a  fact,  which  speaks  whole  volumes  for  the 
character  of  the  Hebrews,  as  contrasted  with  other  people  of 
antiquity,  that  in  the  most  degenerate  periods,  the  worst  of  the 
abandoned  kings  of  Israel  had  the  reputation  of  being  "merci- 
ful" in  war.  (1  Kings  xx.  31.) 

All  the  institutions  of  Moses  were  framed  for  a  people  who 
were  never  to  have  any  part  in  war,  but  in  self-defence,  or  as 
the  appointed  instruments  of  God's  wrath  upon  the  heathen. 
They  were  to  be  as  in  the  best  days  of  Solomon,  who  "  had 
peace  on  all  sides  round  about  him  :  and  Judah  and  Israel  dwelt 
safely,  every  man  under  his  vine  and  under  his  fig-tree,  from 
Dan  even  to  Beersheba." 

The  whole  Mosaic  system  was  opposed  to  war ;  and  all  that 
could  possibly  be  asked  of  the  blessings  and  security  of  peace, 
was  promised  to  the  people,  if  they  would  be  faithful  to  their 
covenant  with  God. 

Hence  as  war  was  no  part  of  the  policy  of  the  Hebrew  Com- 
monwealth we  may  see  a  reason  why  the  Hebrews  were  not 
forbidden  to  make  captives,  and  reduce  them  to  bondage.  It 
was  assumed  that  there  would  be  no  wars,  except  in  circum- 
stances analogous  to  those,  for  which  directions  had  been  given. 
And  so  far  as  appears,  when,  in  subsequent  periods,  wars  were 
undertaken,  or  were  forced  upon  the  people,  it  was  not  their 
custom  to  enslave  the  captives.  Certain  it  is  there  is  no  statute 
on  record,  authorizing  them  to  make  war,  after  the  manner  of 
other  nations ;  and  of  course  none,  which  allowed  them  to 
take  captives  and  make  slaves,  at  their  discretion. 

But  as  all  nations  had  bond-servants,  Moses  would  naturally 
have  felt,  that  it  was  necessary  to  make  some  provision,  by 
4 


30 

which  the  desire  of  a  part  of  the  people  could  be  gratified,  and 
yet  restrained  and  regulated.  This  he  did,  doubtless,  under 
the  divine  sanction.  And  the  way  in  which  the  Hebrews 
might  legally  become  possessed  of  bond-men  and  bond-maids, 
and  as  we  understand  the  statute,  the  only  way,  which  was  de- 
signed and  anticipated,  was  by  purchase  of  the  heathen,  that 
were  round  about  them.  "  Both  thy  bond-men,  and  bond-maids, 
which  thou  shall  have,  shall  be  of  the  heathen  that  are  round 
about  you  ;  of  them  shall  ye  buy  bond-men  and  bond-maids. 
Moreover,  of  the  children  of  the  strangers  that  do  sojourn 
among  you,  of  them  shall  ye  buy,  and  of  their  families  that 
are  with  you,  which  they  beget  in  your  land,  and  they  shall 
be  your  possession.  And  ye  shall  take  them  as  an  inheritance 
for  your  children  after  you,  to  inherit  them  for  a  possession :  they 
shall  be  your  bond-men  forever."  (Lev.  xxv.  44-46.) 

For  the  Canaanites,  slavery  was  regarded  as  too  great  a  priv- 
ilege, or  rather  would  have  subjected  the  seed  of  Abraham  to 
too  great  a  hazard.  Such  was  their  bad  faith,  says  an  eminent 
archasologist,  "the  greatness  of  their  numbers,  and  their  deep 
rooted  idolatry,  that,  had  they  been  introduced  under  any  cir- 
cumstances whatever  into  the  Israelitish  community,  they 
would  certainly  have  endangered  their  existence  as  a  people  of 
God.  The  Gibeonites,  the  Kaphirites,  the  Beerothites  and  the 
inhabitants  of  Kirjath-jearim,  having  surreptitiously  obtained 
a  treaty  with  the  Israelites,  were  made  exceptions  also,  and 
were  employed  in  the  service  of  the  Tabernacle."  (Josh.  ix. 
1-27.)  The  "bond-service"  which  Solomon  "levied"  upon 
those  that  remained  of  the  "  Amorites"  and  their  kindred  tribes, 
was  for  a  temporary  purpose;  and  the  whole  procedure  implies, 
that,  as  a  people,  they  had  been /fee,  and  by  the  subjugation  of 
their  fathers  had  not  been  reduced  to  slavery. 

Those  servants  who  uere  bought  of  the  heathen,  could  be 
held  in  bondage,  at  pleasure,  as  an  inheritance  for  the  masters 
and  their  children.  We  must  so  interpret  the  statutes,  what- 
ever may  have  been  the  practical  operation.  (Lev.  xxv.  46.) 
We  cannot  translate  the  Hebrew  "forever"  as  synonymous 
with  "  the  year  of  jubilee."  It  is  indeed  written  :  "And  ye 
shall  hallow  the  fiftieth  year,  and  proclaim  liberty  throughout 
all  the  land  unto  all  the  inhabitants  thereof:  it  shall  be  a  jubi- 
lee unto  you,  and  ye  shall  return  every  man  unto  his  possession 
and  every  man  unto  his  family."  (Lev.  xxv.  10.)  But  this 
statute,  as  we  must  think,  did  not  include  bond-men  and  bond- 
maids from  the  heathen,  as  inhabitants  of  the  land.  Such 
must  have  been  excepted,  according  to  the  common  ideas 
of  the  people  ;  and  by  the  express  terms  of  the  statute  which 
follows  in  the  same  chapter.  " Inhabita?its  "  were  the  same  as 
citizens. 


31 

But  how  changed  must  have  been  the  condition  of  those 
bond-servants!  They  might,  it  is  true,  be  treated  with  a 
"rigor,"  which  was  forbidden,  in  respect  to  Hebrews.  A 
marked  distinction  was  doubtless  intended  to  be  made,  to  mag- 
nify the  superiority  of  the  chosen  race.  But  those  heathen 
servants  were  to  be  circumcised,  were  to  be  instructed  in  the 
doctrines  and  precepts  of  the  true  God,  and  were  to  partake  of 
the  great  festivals,  and  other  exalted  privileges  of  the  Hebrew 
Commonwealth. 

When  the  national  covenant  was  so  solemnly  made,  under 
the  direction  of  Moses,  just  before  he  disappeared  from  the  sight 
of  the  people,  we  find  "  the  stranger  "  in  their  camp,  from  "the 
hewer  of  wood  "  to  "  the  drawer  of  water,"  standing  before 
God,  with  the  "captains"  of  the  tribes,  their  "elders,"  their 
1 '  officers  "  and  all  "  the  men  of  Israel,"  to  "enter  into  cove- 
nant "  with  God,  that  he  "  might  establish  them  for  a  people  to 
himself."  (Deut.  xxix.  10-13.)  Thus  being  regarded  so  much, 
as  if  Hebrews,  the  laws  applicable  to  Hebrew  servants  would 
essentially  operate  in  their  favor. 

A  very  great  difference  in  their  condition,  as  compared  with 
slaves  in  other  countries,  must  have  been  produced  by  the  Sab- 
bath alone.  How  much  also  by  the  exemption  from  labor  on 
the  days  of  public  festivals  and  other  solemnities,  during  every 
seventh  year,  when  no  seed  was  sown,  and  "  the  land  enjoyed 
her  Sabbaths  !  "  Incomparably  superior,  in  all  respects,  must 
have  been  the  state  of  the  Hebrew  bond-servants,  to  that  of 
those  in  other  lands,  where  was  no  Sabbath  for  the  slave,  and 
no  law  of  mercy  or  justice,  sanctioned  by  the  Judge  of  all. 

The  legitimate  tendency  of  their. social  position,  therefore, 
was  not  to  rivet  upon  them  and  their  children  the  chains  of 
perpetual  servitude  ;  but  to  prepare  them  to  be  fully  incorpora- 
ted with  the  body-politic,  as  "no  more  strangers  and  foreigners, 
but  fellow-citizens."  The  knowledge  of  the  superior  advan- 
tages enjoyed  by  them,  would  be  communicated  to  surround- 
ing and  even  to  more  distant  nations.  And  may  it  not  be,  that 
the  spiritual  benefits  which  they  were  to  receive,  was  a  reason, 
in  the  counsels  of  God,  for  permitting  the  people  of  Israel  to 
bring  them  into  their  families  in  the  relation  of  bond-ser- 
vants ? 

Whenever  the  heathen  were  willing  to  renounce  their  idols 
and  other  abominations,  the  Israelites  appear  to  have  welcomed 
them  to  a  full  participation  in  their  national  and  spiritual  privi- 
leges. We  are  not  aware,  that  in  this  point  there  was  any  re- 
spect of  persons,  as  being  free  or  in  bonds.  What  can  be  more 
obvious,  then,  in  this  view  of  the  privileges  arid  immunities  of 
bpnd-servants,  than  that  many  of  them  might  very  soon  come 
to  occupy  a  similar  ground,  to  that  of  servants  of  Hebrew 


32 

origin,  in  their  real  claims  to  fraternal  sympathy  and  kindness ; 
and  consequently,  that  a  large  proportion,  at  different  times, 
and  especially  in  the  year  of  jubilee,  would  obtain  entire  and 
joyous  manumission  and  citizenship?  Hence  it  may  have 
been  a  fact,  as  has  been  asserted  upon  the  authority  of  learned 
men  of  the  Hebrew  race,  that,  in  the  year  of  jubilee,  or  of 
LIBERTY,  as,  according  to  Josephus,  the  term  denotes,  all  slaves 
were  set  free,  whatever  their  parentage.  At  least,  this  may 
have  been  true,  in  some  instances. 

We  are  not  aware  that  the  Israelites  ever  had  any  such  num- 
bers of  bond-servants,  as  were  to  be  found  in  some  other  an- 
cient countries.  It  was  designed  that  there  should  be  a  general 
equality  and  fraternity,  such  as  could  not  well  exist,  where  a 
few  were  opulent  and  the  many  were  poor,  or  in  comparative 
indigence.  The  face  of  the  country  and  the  climate  would  not 
admit  of  plantations,  like  those  in  our  Southern  States,  or  in 
the  West  Indies.  The  distribution  of  lands  in  small  sections, 
that,  if  possible,  every  man  might  be  a  land-holder  ;  the  laws 
of  inheritance,  and  redemption  of  property  ;  the  employment  of 
the  mass  of  the  people,  as  tillers  of  the  soil,  or  as  shepherds  ; 
the  very  small  number  of  great  cities;  the  manifold  obstacles 
to  the  acquisition  of  large  estates ;  and  more  than  all,  the  moral 
purpose  of  their  institutions, — were  incompatible  with  slave- 
holding,  as  an  integral  or  vital  part  of  the  Mosaic  polity.  So 
far  as  it  existed,  slavery  was  an  appendage,  as  by  special  legis- 
lation, or  a  constitutional  compromise.  Or,  perhaps,  there  is 
reason  enough  to  compare  it  to  the  disease  of  a  limb,  for  which, 
as  a  remedy,  amputation  would  be  more  to  be  dreaded,  than 
toleration.  Just  so  it  was  with  polygamy,  and  the  license  of 
divorce. 

We  are  expressly  told  by  the  "  Lord  of  all,"  that  Moses 
11  suffered"  the  people  "  to  put  away  their  wives,"  not  because 
"  it  was  so  from  the  beginning,"  but  because  of  their  "  hard- 
ness of  heart."  (Mat.  xix.  8.)  They  were  not  prepared  for 
restrictions,  which,  in  the  light  of  the  gospel,  are  seen  to  be  of 
vital  consequence  to  domestic  purity  and  peace.  Was  not  the 
same  tj;ue  of  them,  in  respect  to  bond-service  ?  And  might  not 
Moses  have  sometimes  said,  as  did  the  apostle,  "  /  speak  this 
by  permission,  and  not  of  commandment!" 

But  in  all  the  earth  there  was  no  such  liberty  and  no  such 
happiness  of  home,  as  among  the  chosen  people.  By  the  Mo- 
saic institutions  they  were  exalted  to  heaven,  as  compared  with 
all  the  world  beside. 

Whenever  a  slave  made  his  escape  from  the  surrounding 
heathen  nations,  and  sought  a  residence  among  the  tribes  of 
Israel,  he  was  not  to  be  delivered  up  to  his  master.  "  He  shall 
dwell  with  thee,  even  among  you  in  that  place  which  he  shall 


S3 

choose  in  one  of  thy  gates,  where  it  liketh  him  best :  thou  shall 
not  oppress  him."  (Deut.  xxiii.  15,  16.)  "The  Lord  your 
God  is  a  God  of  gods,  and  Lord  of  lords,  a  great  God,  a  mighty, 
and  a  terrible,  which  regardeth  not  persons,  nor  taketh  reward  ; 
he  doth  execute  the  judgment  of  the  fatherless  and  widow, 
and  loveth  the  stranger,  in  giving  him  food  and  raiment.  Love 
ye  therefore  the  stranger  ;  for  ye  were  strangers  in  the  land  of 
Egypt."  (Dent.  x.  17-19.) 

Of  the  Gentile  race,  it  is  unquestionable,  that  individuals 
rose  to  eminence  in  Israel,  by  their  endowments  and  exertions, 
in  the  arts  of  war  and  peace.  Even  bond-servants  were  not 
denied  honorable  connections  by  marriage.  An  instance  is 
given  in  I  Chron.  ii.  34,  35.  "  Now  Sheshan  had  no  sons,  but 
daughters  ;  and  Sheshan  had  a  servant,  an  Egyptian,  whose 
name  was  Jarha.  And  Sheshan  gave  his  daughter  to  Jarha  his 
servant,  to  wife." 

Differences  of  color,  which,  in  some  cases,  as  it  is  believed, 
were  not  small,  are  not  known  to  have  presented  any  insuper- 
able, if  any  opposing  barrier,  to  elevation  and  social  improve- 
ment. We  certainly  may  so  believe,  if  a  "spouse  "  of  Solomon 
when  "  in  all  his  glory,"  could  say  of  herself,  what  is  repre- 
sented in  "  The  Song  of  Songs."  (i.  5.) 

Thus,  to  say  no  more,  the  mode  of  bond-service,  in  its  con- 
templated and  its  actual  character,  as  authorized  and  regulated 
by  law,  in  the  land  of  promise,  must  have  exhibited  a  stupen- 
dous contrast  of  faith  and  virtue,  brotherly  kindness  and 
charity,  to  the  oppressive  and  merciless  exactions  and  inflic- 
tions, so  common  and  so  natural,  among  the  idolatrous  nations 
of  the  earth. 

We  would  now  say  distinctly,  that,  as  we  understand  the 
right  of  the  Israelites  to  hold  bond-servants,  it  was  wholly  de- 
rived from  divine  permission.  It  was  granted,  or  rather  not 
denied  to  them,  when  emerging  from  a  semi-barbarous  state  ; 
and  when  it  would  have  been  next  to  impossible  to  enforce  an 
absolute  prohibition  of  all  servitude.  The  indulgence  was 
given,  under  the  same  sovereign  authority,  which  commanded 
as  well  as  permitted  them  to  take  violent  possession  of  the  land 
of  Canaan.  It  may  have  been  in  part,  at  least  so  far  as  the 
heathen  were  concerned,  for  an  essentially  similar  reason. 
Joshua  and  his  armies  could  never  have  been  justified  in  driving 
out  the  Canaanites  by  sword  and  fire,  unless  the  Ruler  of 
nations  had  expressly  directed  them  to  do  it,  as  the  instruments 
of  his  righteous  visitation  upon  those  incorrigible  sinners  ;  and 
for  ulterior  purposes,  in  his  distinguishing  mercy  towards  Abra- 
ham and  his  seed,  and  the  countless  millions  of  the  Gentiles, 
who,  in  after  ages  were  to  be  blest  immeasurably  in  the  great 
Redeemer  of  the  world.  Let  no  man  impeach  "  the  goodness" 
4* 


34 

or  "  the  severity  "  of  Him  who  is  "  wonderful  in  counsel  and 
excellent  in  working  ! " 

It  must  be  admitted  by  any  candid  objector,  that  a  civil, 
social  or  moral  right,  which  does  not  exist  naturally,  may  be 
created,  or  sanctioned,  by  a  positive  institution,  or  an  extra- 
judicial  ordinance  of  the  Most  High.  Where,  however,  such 
au  institution  or  ordinance  does  not  apply  in  its  provisions,  or 
when  it  has  fulfilled  its  purposes, — then  what  has  been  pre- 
scribed, granted,  or  countenanced,  may  be  or  may  become  an 
abomination  and  abhorrence.  Would  it  now  be  acceptable  to 
God  to  erect  altars  in  Massachusetts,  and  offer  whole  burnt 
offerings  thereon  ?  And  is  there  reason  to  think,  that  it  would 
be  any  more  agreeable  to  the  divine  will,  if  our  legislature 
should  add  to  the  "  Revised  Statutes  "  the  identical  laws  of 
Moses,  respecting  slavery  ? 

It  may  also  be  suggested,  that  an  act,  or  custom,  or  positive 
institution,  when  right,  because  commanded  or  permitted  by 
divine  authority,  must  be  supposed  to  have  tendencies  and  fa- 
vorable influences  upon  the  interests  of  virtue  and  happiness, 
which  would  have  no  existence,  without  the  divine  favor  ac- 
companying such  command  or  permission.  But  in  all  cases, 
whatever  depends  upon  mere  permission,  is  to  be  judged  in  re- 
spect to  its  intrinsic  character,  or  by  the  original  and  immutable 
ordinances  of  justice  and  mercy.  Thus  it  is,  that  we  decide 
against  polygamy,  and  decide  it  to  be  wrong. 

The  Mosaic  code  was  made,  not  for  angels  unfallen,  but  for 
men  who  had  exceedingly  "corrupted  "  their  "  way  upon  the 
earth." — Whatever  may  now  be  thought,  many  of  those  cere- 
monial provisions,  which  made  "the  law  "  so  much  "  a  yoke 
of  bondage,"  in  contrast  with  the  u  liberty  "  of  the  gospel,  and 
which  would  be  to  us  intolerable,  were  of  the  highest  impor- 
tance in  the  age  of  the  Exodus,  in  teaching  the  twelve  tribes 
the  duty  and  the  very  idea  of  holiness.  The  restrictions  to 
which  they  were  subjected,  were  in  many  respects,  so  contrary 
to  all  their  previous  conceptions  and  habits,  that,  in  considering 
the  past,  present  and  the  future,  their  incomparable  lawgiver 
demonstrated  his  "  divine  legation,"  in  so  admirably  adapting 
the  details  of  his  mixed  spiritual  and  ceremonial,  civil  and  ju- 
dicial system,  to  the  community  as  it  then  was,  and  as  it 
might  afterwards  become.  Indulgences  or  allowances,  with 
restraints,  would  be  unavoidable.  In  our  own  day,  if  indul- 
gences are  tacitly  or  expressly  granted,  it  is  not  to  be  understood, 
that  the  legislators  who  frame  the  statutes  or  regulations,  in 
reference  to  any  custom  or  practice,  approve  of  that  custom  or 
practice.  Quite  the  contrary  is  often  the  fact.  And  in  many 
cases,  the  very  necessity  of  a  statute  is  a  condemnation  of  the 
subject-matter  which  it  is  designed  to  regulate. 


35 

It  appears  to  us,  therefore,  that  modern  slave-holding  systems 
cannot  be  vindicated  by  an  appeal  to  the  existence  of  slavery 
among  the  Hebrews.  Slave-holders  should  now  adduce  the  evi- 
dence of  similar  permission,  unequivocal  and  indisputable. 
The  laws  of  Moses  are  not  the  laws  of  the  world,  or  of  any 
part  of  the  world.  The  slave-holder  must  look  elsewhere  for 
his  authority  to  buy  and  to  hold  bond-servants.  Let  him  show, 
if  he  can,  a  title-deed,  ratified  and  sealed  by  the  hand  of  Him, 
who  no  longer  confers  exclusive  privileges  upon  Jew  or  Gen- 
tile. God,  in  his  infinite  favor,  has  "  provided  some  better 
thing  for  us." 

We  have  been  thus  particular  in  our  examination  of  the  wit- 
ness of  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament,  because  we  regard 
this  part  of  our  work  as  of  the  highest  importance.  We  have 
much  more,  that  we  should  be  glad  to  say,  particularly  in  refe- 
rence to  the  principles,  the  interior  and  pervading  spirit  of 
benignity  and  philanthropy,  which  the  letter  and  external  form 
of  the  laws  and  institutions  of  the  Hebrew  Commonwealth  do 
not  appear  to  have  always  suggested  to  those  who  have  ex- 
amined them.  It  may  be  our  mistake  or  misapprehension,  but 
it  seems  to  us  very  manifest,  that  the  simple  letter  of  the  Mosaic 
code,  rather  than  its  SPIRIT  and  LIFE,  has  been  far  too  often  and 
exclusively  considered. 

Suppose  now,  that  the  Hebrew  religion,  instead  of  being 
confined  to  a  peculiar  people,  had  been  universal  in  its  direct 
and  immediate  application  ;  or,  which  would  have  been  the 
same  in  effect, — suppose  that  all  nations  had  become  holy  unto 
the  Lord, — where  would  have  been  found  the  Gentiles  to  steal 
men,  or  to  "  make  merchandise  "  of  brethren?  In  the  common 
acceptation  of  the  term,  there  would  not  have  been  a  single 
slave  upon  the  face  of  the  earth  ! 

Hence  it  is  as  certain,  as  any  moral  demonstration  can  be, 
that  except  as  punishment  for  crime, — the  real  genius,  the  true 
spirit  of  the  Mosaic  institutions,  is  utterly  repugnant  and  de- 
structive to  all  slave-holding  and  slavery  !  It  is  the  spirit  of 
UNIVERSAL  FREEDOM,  and  therefore  the  genius  of  UNIVERSAL 

EMANCIPATION. 

To  the  advocates  of  slave-holding  who  refer  us  to  the  Mosaic 
institutions  or  statutes,  we  may  be  allowed  to  say,  that,  "  as 
ministers  of  the  New  Testament,"  so  would  we  be  of  the  Old ; 
"  not  of  the  letter,  but  of  the  spirit ;  for  the  letter  killeth,  but 
the  spirit  giveth  life  !  "  "  Therefore  all  things  whatsoever  ye 
would  that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them  ;  for 
this  is  the  law  and  the  prophets  !  " 


It  was  no  fault  of  the  law  of  Moses,  that  its  spirituality  and 
benignity  were  not  more  generally  perceived  and  appreciated. 
The  gospel  of  Christ  is  now  rejected  by  many,  and  is  far  from 
having  its  perfect  work,  in  those  who  acknowledge  its  immeas- 
urable excellency,  But  neither  the  former  nor  the  latter  dis- 
pensation of  the  grace  of  God,  is  responsible  for  human  per- 
verseness  and  intractableness. 

The  civil  and  ceremonial  provisions  of  the  Mosaic  system 
were  accommodated  to  the  condition  of  the  chosen  people,  with 
ultimate  designs,  which  required  ages  for  their  full  development. 
And  although  most  wise  and  excellent,  in  the  circumstances  of 
that  people,  and  of  the  world,  yet  "the  law  made  nothing  per- 
fect," as  did  "  the  bringing  in  of  a  better  hope."  "Having  a 
shadow  of  good  things  to  come  and  not  the  very  image  of  the 
things,"  the  whole  fabric  of  Moses  was  for  a  season  only.  It 
was  not  ordained  of  God  to  be  perpetual.  And  can  it  be  a 
question,  whether,  in  "  the  grace  and  truth  "  which  "  came  by 
Jesus  Christ,"  there  can  be  any  less  of  the  spirit  of  universal 
philanthropy  and  freedom,  than  in  the  positive  and  temporary 
institutions,  or  in  the  moral  and  fundamental  principles  of  "  the 
law,"  which  "came  by  Moses?"  As  it  regards  the  latter, 
there  can  be  no  room  for  a  doubt.  The  gospel  arid  the  law,  or 
the  New  Testament  and  the  Old.  are  one  and  inseparable  in 
those  principles  of  righteousness  and  love,  which,  like  the 
source  of  all  being  and  blessing,  are  from  everlasting  to  ever- 
lasting. And  "  if  that  which  is  done  away  was  glorious,  much 
more  that  which  remaineth  is  glorious." 

Happy  would  it  have  been  with  the  Hebrews,  if  "they  had 
cordially  obeyed  the  statutes  of  their  sacred  code,  and  had  more 
diligently  considered,  so  as  to  discern  the  spirit  of  their  ritual. 
The  Mosaic  system,  in  a  fair  operation,  would  have  put  an 
entire  end  to  all  slave-holding  among  them. 

There  is  no  evidence,  we  believe,  that  such  a  place  as  a 
slave-market  was  ever  known  at  Jerusalem,  or  in  any  of  the 
cities  of  the  land  while  the  people  preserved  their  independence. 
There  is  no  mention  of  "  the  persons  of  men,"  among  the  arti- 
cles of  traffic,  which  the  ships  of  Solomon  brought  from  Ophir; 
nor  in  any  other  notice  of  Hebrew  commerce.  Yet  it  is  not  at 
all  improbable,  that  individuals  were  sometimes  concerned  in 
the  slave-trade  of  other  nations.  In  some  instances  the  num- 
ber may  have  been  great,  when  an  opportunity  was  afforded  of 
making  large  gains,  by  buying  the  captives  which  were  offered 
for  sale,  by  tens  of  thousands,  as  after  the  conquest  of  a  populous 
city,  like  Sidon,  by  Artaxerxes  Ochus,  or  Tyre,  by  Alexander 
the  Great. 


37 

The  neighboring  powers  of  Tyre  and  Sidon,  at  one  period, 
had  sold  many  of  the  Hebrews  to  the  Greeks.  From  what  is 
said  of  them  in  the  Book  of  Joel,  it  is  evident,  that  this  traffic 
in  men  had  been  pursued  in  the  most  reckless  and  revolting 
manner.  In  the  terrible  retribution  which  was  denounced,  the 
avenging  God  of  "  the  children  of  Judah  "  declared  :  "  I  will 
raise  them  out  of  the  place  whither  ye  have  sold  them,  and  will 
return  recompense  upon  your  own  head.  And  I  will  sell  your 
sons  and  your  daughters  into  the  hand  of  the  children  of  Judah, 
and  they  shall  sell  them  to  the  Sabeans,  to  a  people  far  off:  for 
the  Lord  hath  spoken  it."  (Ch.  iii.) 

The  fulfillment  of  this  prophecy  is  among  the  well  authenti- 
cated memorials  of  the  age  of  Alexander.  Many  of  those  who 
had  been  sold  into  Greece  were  set  at  liberty  ;  while  the  Ty- 
rians  and  Sidonians  who  had  sold  them,  were  doomed  to  slavery 
by  the  conquerors,  and  were  purchased  by  some  of  the  Jews, 
who  sold  them  to  the  Sabeans  and  Arabians. 

A  part  of  those  purchased,  it  is  very  likely,  were  sold  to 
Jews,  or  were  retained  by  the  purchasers  in  their  own  families. 
In  the  three  centuries  following  the  age  of  Alexander,  there 
was  no  diminution  of  the  slave-holding  spirit  among  the  Gen- 
tiles, either  of  Asia,  Europe  or  Africa.  And  we  are  not  able  to 
affirm,  that,  at  any  time  previous  to  the  Christian  era,  the  Jews 
had  no  slaves  among  them.  But  the  manner  in  which  the 
slave-merchants  are  alluded  to,  who  came  with  the  armies  of 
Syria  in  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees,  very  plainly  shows  how 
such  a  commerce,  as  that  in  men,  was  regarded  by  those  noble 
champions^of  Hebrew  liberty.  (1  Mac.  iii.  41,  &c.  •  2  Mac. 
viii.  10,  11,  34-36.)  And  such,  in  general,  was  the  public 
sentiment,  or  the  various  influence  of  divers  causes,  that,  when 
the  Messiah  appeared,  there  is  much  reason  for  the  opinion,  that 
both  polygamy  and  slavery  had  so  far  been  abolished,  as  not  to 
require  any  specific  notice  in  his  admonitory  and  reformative 
instructions.  — 

In  the  judgment  of  biblical  scholars,  who  are  among  the 
best  qualified  to  determine  the  point,  it  is  very  questionable,  if, 
"  in  the  days  of  his  flesh,"  the  eye  of  the  Great  Reformer  ever 
rested  upon  a  single  slave.  And  one  case  only,  that  of  the 
young  servant  of  a  Roman  centurion,  who,  at  Capernaum,  ex- 
hibited "  so  great  faith,"  can  be  cited  as  an  example,  that  the 
relation  of  master  and  slave  was  ever  brought  directly  before 
him,  in  any  of  his  ministrations.  But  it  is  far  from  being  cer- 
tain, that  the  servant  in  question  was  a  bond-servant.  The 
terms  used  in  each  of  the  narratives  of  the  miracle  of  healing, 
which,  in  the  circumstances,  was  so  memorable,  might  as  we 
think,  have  been  employed  as  they  are,  even  by  a  Roman,  if 
'  that  servant  had  been  as  free  as  was  the  centurion  himself. 


38 

The  compassionate  interposition  of  the  Saviour  was  besought 
as  earnestly,  as  if  he  were  no  less  dear  to  his  master  than  an 
own  son.  (Mat.  viii.  8  ;  Luke  vii.  2-10.) 

In  all  the  recorded  discourses  and  conversations  of  our  Lord, 
there  are  but  a  very  few  instances,  in  which  any  allusion  what- 
ever was  made  to  the  subject  of  servitude.  And  in  no  one  of 
these  is  the  idea  of  slavery,  as  we  use  the  term,  necessarily  or 
strongly  implied.  (Mat.  vi.  24  ;  Comp.  Luke  xvi.  13;  Mat.  xiii. 
27,  28  ;  John  viii.  33  ;  xiii.  15  ;  xv.  20.)  However  the  fact 
may  be  explained,  there  is  not,  in  either  of  the  Gospels,  any 
affirmation  of  right  or  condemnation  of  wrong,  in  respect  to 
master  or  slave, — any  more  than  there  is  of  direct  rebuke  of 
idolaters  and  their  abominable  iniquities. 

The  Great  Teacher  said  nothing  of  the  gladiatorial  exhibi- 
tions, so  common  and  so  bloody  in  the  Roman  empire,  or  of 
other  customs  and  practices,  which  were,  of  course,  utterly  in- 
consistent with  the  well-being  of  society,  and  repugnant  to 
every  principle  of  the  gospel.  Even  upon  great  questions  of 
civil  polity,  which  have  since  become  so  vastly  interesting, 
throughout  the  civilized  world,  he  delivered  no  discourse  and 
gave  no  counsel,  which  could  have  any  immediate  tendency 
to  disturb  the  submission  of  the  Jews  to  the  throne  of  Caesar. 

The  accomplishment  of  the  grand  design  of  the  Redeemer's 
coming  into  our  world,  did  not  admit  of  his  directing  the  atten- 
tion of  his  hearers  or  of.  his  disciples,  to  those  subjects,  which 
would  at  once  have  given  his  mission  the  aspect  of  a  treason- 
able conspiracy  against  the  power  of  Rome,  or,  at  least,  of  a 
lawless  and  fanatical  movement,  for  the  destruction  of  existing 
social  relations.  Enough  for  the  hour,  at  that  momentous  crisis 
in  the  history  of  our  redemption,  that  the  Lord  of  life  should 
publish  a  system  of  grace  and  truth,  involving  principles,  which, 
in  their  intended  and  inevitable  result,  so  far  as  applied,  would 
be  subversive  of  every  institution  or  custom,  which  is  at  vari- 
ance with  the  highest  virtue  and  glory  of  man.  Such  a  system 
the  gospel  claims  to  be,  in  all  its  elements  and  in  all  its  charac- 
teristics. And  if  it  be  "  diametrically  opposed  to  the  principle 
of  slavery,"  as  is  maintained  by  an  eminent  expounder  of 
Christian  ethics,  and  by  many  others,  then  is  it  undeniable, 
as  he  also  maintains,  that  "  it  must  be  opposed  to  the  practice  of 
slavery ;  and  therefore,  were  the  principles  of  the  gospel  fully 
adopted,  slavery  could  not  exist."* 

"  The  very  reason"  it  has  elsewhere  been  said  by  the  same 
author, — "why  this  mode  of  teaching  was  adopted,  was  to  ac- 
complish the  universal  abolition  of  slavery.  A  precept  could 
not  have  done  this  ;  for,  in  the  changing  condition  of  human 

*  Wayland's  Elements  of  Moral  Science. 


39 

society,  the  means  would  have  easily  been  devised  for  eluding 
it.  But  by  teaching  truths,  the  very  truths  in  which  Chris- 
tianity consisted,  utterly  and  absolutely  opposed  to  slavery, 
truths  founded  in  the  essential  moral  relation^  of  creatures  to 
their  Creator,  it  was  rendered  certain  that  wherever  Christianity 
was  understood  and  obeyed,  this  institution  must  cease  to 
exist."* 

And  we  may  add  to  these  statements,  without  anticipating 
what  we  have  to  say  in  the  sequel, — that  the  method  of  Christ 
and  the  apostles  in  regard  to  slavery,  is  precisely  that  which 
the  ablest  apologistsf  for  the  right  or  lawfulness  of  slave-hold- 
ing have  described,  and  declared  to  be,  the  only  consistent 
method  for  Christians  at  the  present  day.  And  they  admit  the 
fact,  as  indisputable,  that  the  gospel,  by  its  legitimate  operation, 
did  abolish  the  slavery  of  the  Roman  empire. 

It  is  indeed  in  precepts  or  commandments,  that  we  have  the 
literal  rule  of  duty.  But  it  is  in  the  principles,  upon,  which 
those  precepts  are  founded,  and  in  the  doctrines  and  examples 
which  reveal  or  illustrate  the  nature  of  our  obligations,  and  the 
proper  motives  of  cordial  obedience,  that  we  have  the  highest, 
the  most  ennobling,  and  the  most  effectual  instructions  of  Chris- 
tian virtue.  Without  these,  in  a  distinct  perception  and  recog- 
nition, the  precepts  of  our  holy  religion  would  never  find  a  re- 
sponse of  love  in  the  heart.  Without  these,  also,  it  would  be 
impossible  to  feel  the  admiring  and  adoring  sentiment  of  the 
Psalmist,  when  he  exclaimed  :  "  I  have  seen  an  end  of  all  per- 
fection ;  but  THY  COMMANDMENT  IS  EXCEEDING  BHOAD  !  " 

Our  duty,  then,  to  God  and  to  one  another,  we  do  not  seek 
to  learn,  preeminently,  in  the  precepts,  but  in  the  great  and  pri- 
mary principles  and  doctrines  of  "  the  law  of  the  spirit  of  life 
in  Christ  Jesus."  And  in  proportion  as  these  are  apprehended 
and  exert  their  legitimate  influence,  the  gospel  will  have  its 
"  free  course,"  and  be  glorified,  as  a  "  perfect  law  of  liberty." 

Every  good  citizen  obeys  the  laws  of  his  country,  not  be- 
cause of  their  "terror,"  but  because  of  his  sentiments  and  con- 
victions of  uprightness  and  order.  And  the  sincere  Christian, 
who  in  his  outward  life  reflects  most  of  the  "image  of  God,  in 
righteousness  and  true  holiness,"  is  influenced,  and  transformed 
into  that  image,  immeasurably  more  by  his  filial  acquaintance 
with  God  in  Christ,  than  by  any  of  the  most  fearful  denuncia- 
tions of  "eternal  judgment." 

Hence,  as  we  understand  our  relations  to  the  Judge  of  all  the 
earth,  we  should  be  guilty  of  a  most  flagrant  error,  if  we  were 
not  to  recognize  the  cardinal  principles  and  doctrines  of  Chris- 
tianity, as  the  clearest  and  surest  exponents  of  his  sovereign 

*  Wayland's  Letters  to  Fuller.  t  Fuller's  Letters  to  Wayland. 


40 

will,  in  the  more  specific  directions  of  precept  or  commandment. 
Thus  if  we  would  know  what  interpretation  we  are  to  give  to 
the  GOLDEN  RULE,  it  will  not  suffice  to  consider  the  literal  form 
of  the  words  ^nly,  in  which  it  comes  to  us.  If  we  would 
comprehend  its  beneficence  and  its  justice,  in  its  thousand  dif- 
ferent applications,  we  must  remember  those  many  other  "gra- 
cious words,"  which  are  like  the  parable  of  the  "  Good  Samari- 
tan "  in  answering  the  question — "Who  is  my  neighbor?" 
And  if,  upon  the  subject  now  before  us,  we  would  know  and 
judge  rightly  the  witness  of  the  "  Revelation  of  Jesus  Christ" 
in  the  New  Testament,  we  must  open  our  whole  heart  to  the 
radiance  of  the  TKUTH,  which  makes  us  "free  indeed."  Ac- 
cording to  the  gospel,  all  mankind  are  placed  upon  the  same 
level  before  God.  Jew  and  Gentile,  barbarian  and  Scythian, 
bond  and  free,  are  all  one  in  Christ.  All  were  redeemed  by  the 
same  blood.  All  have  the  same  title  to  become  "  heirs  of  sal- 
vation," All  should  be,  in  deed  and  in  truth,  brethren  beloved. 
How,  then,  could  any  man,  with  "the  love  of  Christ  constrain- 
ing" him,  ever  make  a  slave  of  his  fellow-man  ?  And  in  what 
land  does  slavery  exist,  without  assuming,  that  there  is  a  distinc- 
tion and  a  difference  between  the  slave  and  his  master,  which  is 
radically  and  irreconcilably  opposed  to  the  very  first  principles, 
both  of  evangelical  and  civil  liberty,  equality  and  fraternity  ? 
How  can  any  man  believe,  that  he  himself  as  a  slave-holder  and 
a  Christian,  would  be  willing  to  be  deprived  of  his  liberty  :  to 
be  retained  in  servitude;  to  be  bought  and  sold  at  pleasure, — for 
the  same  reasons  and  upon  the  same  principles  that  he  holds  his 
own  slaves  in  bondage? 

"Domestic  slavery,"  says  Dr.  Wayland,  "proceeds  upon  the 
principle,  that  the  master  has  a  right  to  control  the  actions, 
physical  and  intellectual,  of  the  slave,  for  his  own,  that  is,  the 
master's,  individual  benefit ;  and  of  course,  that  the  happiness  of 
the  master,  when  it  comes  in  competition  with  the  happiness  of 
the  slave,  extinguishes  in  the  latter  the  right  to  pursue  it.  It 
supposes,  at  best,  that  the  relation  between  master  and  slave  is 
not  that  which  exists  between  man  and  man,  but  is  a  modifica- 
tion of  that  which  exists  between  man  and  the  brutes.  Now 
this  manifestly  supposes,  that  two  classes  of  beings  are  created 
with  dissimilar  rights  ;  that  the  master  possesses  rights  which 
have  never  been  conceded  by  the  slave;  and,  that  the  slave  has 
no  rights  at  all  over  the  means  of  happiness  which  God  has 
given  him,  whenever  these  means  of  happiness  can  be  rendered 
available  to  the  service  of  the  master.  It  supposes  that  the 
Creator  intended  one  human  being  to  govern  the  physical,  intel- 
lectual and  moral  actions,  of  as  many  other  human  beings,  as 
by  purchase  he  can  bring  within  his  physical  power;  and  that 
one  human  being  may  thus  acquire  a  right  to  sacrifice  the  hap- 


41 

piness  of  any  number  of  other  human  beings  for  the  purpose  of 
promoting  his  own." 

This  general  statement  of  "  the  principle  of  slavery,"  we  are 
aware,  would  not  be  received  by  those,  who  contend  that  sla- 
very like  despotism  is  to  be  regarded  as  in  itself  among  the 
things  which  are  indifferent,  and  which  are  right  or  wrong  only 
according  to  circumstances.  But  it  is  much  easier  to  deny  the 
statement,  than  to  disprove  it. — And  let  any  man,  if  he  can,  re- 
fer us  to  any  better  "  principle  of  slavery." 

It  is  not  for  the  slave-holder  to  assume,  that  vested  or  legal 
rights  are  superior  to  those  which  belong  to  the  slave,  as  a 
man,  and  which  have  been  forfeited  by  no  crime.  It  is  not 
for  the  -slave-holder  to  say,  that  other  men  would  do  as  he 
does,  in  like  circumstances.  Neither  is  it  to  the  purpose  to  al- 
lege, that,  if  the  slave  could  change  his  place  for  that  of  his 
master,  he  would  be  a  slave-holder.  The  question  is,  What  is 
right  before  God  ?  The  criterion  of  duty  to  our  fellow-man, 
is  not  what  we  do,  or  what  others  would  do  ;  but  what  we  and 
they  ought  to  do. 

If  the  slave-holder  shall  affirm,  that  his  slave  is  inferior  to 
himself,  and  therefore  he  has  a  right  to  hold  him  in  servitude, — 
the  argument  would  prove  infinitely  too  much  ;  whatever  be 
the  kind  of  inferiority,  which  might  be  intended  or  conceded. 
Is  it  not  a  dictate  of  the  Golden  Rule,  that,  if  we  have  any  ad- 
vantage over  our  fellow-men,  in  intellect,  in  knowledge,  in  sta- 
tion, in  wealth,  it  is  our  duty  "to  do  good  and  to  communicate" 
the  more, — enlightening,  improving,  elevating  those  who  are  of 
the  same  great  family,  instead  of  subjugating  them,  oppressing 
them,  and  degrading  if  not  destroying  them  ? — And  if  existing 
laws  in  the  slave-holding  States  are  incompatible  with  the  in- 
tellectual advancement,  and  the  general  progress  of  the  slaves, 
according  to  their  ability,  in  those  varied  attainments,  which 
exalt  man  in  the  scale  of  being,  and  enable  him  the  more  emi- 
nently to  glorify  God, — can  those  laws  be  consistent  with  the 
gospel  ?  Can  the  system,  which  imperatively  requires  them 
for  its  very  existence,  be  otherwise  than  antagonistical  to  the 
"  love  which  is  of  God,"  and  with  which  "  we  ought  to  love 
one  another  ?  "  So  far  as  the  gospel  can  be  said  to  have  legis- 
lated for  man,  is  it  not  for  all  men  ? — Were  its  precepts  or  in- 
junctions/or the  slave-holder,  and  against  the  slave  ;  so  that  it 
is  the  right  of  the  former  to  act  for  the  latter,  as  if  the  latter 
were  first  of  all  amenable  to  the  will  of  the  former  ? 

The  advocates  of  slavery  have  much  to  say  of  the  right  of 
the  master  to  oblige  the  slave  to  submit  to  his  commands.  Why 
is  it  that  so  little  has  been  said  of  the  obligation  of  the  slave, 
whether  natural  or  moral,  to  be  his  master's  property  and  to  be 
used  or  sold  like  a  brute  or  chattel  ?  What  right  can  the  mas- 
5 


42 

ter  have  to  his  slave,  which  is  not  immeasurably  below  the 
highest  and  most  sacred  of  all  natural  rights, — the  right  of  man 
to  himself,  in  the  fear  of  God  ? 

As  we  understand  the  claims  of  right  to  oblige  the  slave  to 
submit  to  his  master,  in  all  things ;  and  as  the  laws  which  up- 
hold these  claims  must  certainly  mean,  if  they  mean  any  thing  ; 
it  would  be  as  impossible  for  many  of  the  slaves  to  serve  God, 
according  to  his  Word,  and  serve  their  masters,  as  their  masters 
require  of  them,  as  it  would  be  for  a  man  to  be  an  exemplary 
Christian,  while  he  daily  worshipped  a  graven  image  of  Brarnha 
or  Moloch. 

When  the  commandment  is,  "Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy 
God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  it'  is  im- 
plied, that  man's  love  of  himself  must  be,  not  only  in  accord- 
ance with  supreme  love  to  God,  but  also  promotive  of  this  love 
in  himself  and  others.  He  is  not  to  make  his  own  selfish  and 
unholy  passions  and  predilections  the  criterion  or  measure  of 
his  duty  of  love  to  his  neighbor.  The  "  love"  which  is  "the 
fulfilling  of  the  law,"  "  worketh  no  ill  to  his  neighbor,"  any 
more  than  to  himself.  And  he  must  love  himself  and  be  in- 
clined to  do  for  himself,  and  for  all  others,  according  to  his  rela- 
tions and  obligations,  as  a  subject  of  the  moral  and  paternal 
government  of  God.  He  must,  therefore,  regard  all  men  as 
members  of  the  same  family  ;  as  subjects  of  the  same  moral 
government;  as  having  the  same  essential  wants,  intellectual 
and  spiritual  as  well  as  physical  and  social  ;  as  recognized  alike 
in  the  rich  provisions  of  divine  bounty  and  grace  :  and  thus 
holding  such  a  relation,  each  one  to  every  other,  that  all  should 
seek  to  do  good  and  not  evil  to  every  one,  whatever  his 
country,  his  color,  or  his  condition. 

Can  it  be  doubted,  that  every  man  is  bound  to  have  that  kind 
of  regard  for  himself,  and  that  only,  which  will  best  enable 
him  to  answer  the  great  end  for  which  God  made  him  a  "living 
soul"?  No  man's  personal  happiness  is  any  more  important  to 
himself,  than  is  that  of  any  other  man  to  himself.  Where,  then, 
in  the  law  of  love  to  God  and  man,  as  expounded  by  the  Great 
Teacher  of  the  world, — where  in  any  of  his  words  of  doctrine, 
and  of  instruction  in  righteousness,— is  there  to  be  discerned 
the  "shadow  of  a  shade"  of  sanction  for  the  claim  of  right,  to 
hold  a  fellow-man,  though  a  brother  in  Christ,  in  bondage;  and, 
for  neither  his  debt  nor  his  crime,  to  compel  him  to  be  a  slave, 
by  what  ever  means  affecting  his  physical,  social,  intellectual 
and  moral  nature,  his  entire  submission  to  his  master's  will  is  to 
be  secured?  Let  the  law  of  love  be  fulfilled,  in  all  its  length 
and  breadth,  and  the  doom  of  slavery  would  be  sealed  in  a  day. 

"  The  Christian  religion,"  it  has  been  said  by  one  of  its  most 
respected  living  witnesses,  "teaches  that  'God  hath  made  of 


43 

one  blood  all  the  nations  of  men  for  to  dwell  on  all  the  face  of 
the  earth,'  (Acts  xvii.  26.)  and  that  as  children  of  the  common 
Father  they  are  regarded  as  equal.  All  the  right  which  one  hu- 
man being  has  ever  been  supposed  to  have  over  another,  in  virtue 
of  any  superiority  in  rank,  complexion,  or  blood,  is  evidently 
contrary  to  this  doctrine  of  the  Bible,  in  regard  to  the  origin 
and  equality  of  the  human  race.  *  *  A  man  may  be  wiser 
or  less  wise  than  I  am ;  he  may  have  more  or  less  property  ; 
he  may  have  a  more  richly  endowed,  or  an  inferior  mental  ca- 
pacity ;  but  this  does  not  affect  our  common  nature.  He  is  in 
every  respect,  notwithstanding  our  difference  in  these  things, 
as  completely  a  human  being  as  myself;  and  he  stands  in  pre- 
cisely the  same  relations  towards  the  Creator  as  Father  of  all. 
*  *  *  It  is  his  right  and  privilege  to  seek  to  know  the  will 
of  God,  and  to  act  always  with  reference  to  the  future  state  on 
which  he  is  soon  to  enter.  *  *  *  It  was  with  reference  to 
this  common  nature,  that  redemption  was  provided.  *  *  * 
Every  human  being  has  a  right  to  feel,  that,  when  the  Son  of 
God  became  incarnate,  he  took  his  nature  upon  him,  and  to  re- 
gard him  as  the  representative  of  that  common  humanity.  It 
is  on  the  basis  of  that  common  nature,  that  the  gospel  is  com- 
manded to  be  preached  to  'every  creature,'  and  any  one  hu- 
man being  has  a  right  to  consider  that  gospel  as  addressed  to 
him,  with  as  specific  an  intention,  as  any  other*  human  being 
whatever.  It  is  on  the  basis  of  that  common  nature,  also,  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  sent  down  from  heaven  to  awaken,  convict, 
and  convert  the  soul  ;  and  any  human  being,  no  matter  what 
his  complexion,  may  regard  the  promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
be  as  much  addressed  to  him  as  to  any  other  one — though  that 
other  one  may  have  a  more  comely  form  or  complexion  ;  may 
be  clothed  in  the  imperial  purple,  or  may  wear  a  coronet,  or  a 
crown.  In  all  respects  pertaining  to  our  common  origin  ;  to 
our  nature  as  distinct  from  the  brute  creation  ;  to  the  fall  and 
to  redemption,  to  the  rights  of  conscience  and  to  the  hopes  of 
glory,  the  human  race  is  regarded  in  the  Bible  as  on  a  level. 
There  is  an  entire  system  of  things,  which  contemplates  man 
as  such,  as  distinguished  from  the  inferior  creation  ;  not  one  of 
which  pertains  to  a  brute,  however  the  brute  may  seem  to  ap- 
proximate a  human  being,  and  each  one  of  which  is  as  appli- 
cable to  one  human  being  as  to  another." 

"  If  these  views  are  correct,  then  all  the  reliance  which  the 
system  of  slavery  has  ever  been  thought  to  derive  from  the 
supposed  fact,  that  one  class  of  human  beings  is  essentially  in- 
ferior to  another,  is  a  false  reliance.  At  all  events,  such  views 
will  find  no  support  in  the  Bible,  and  they  must  be  left  to  be 
maintained  by  those,  who  recognize  the  Christian  Scriptures  as 
of  no  authority.  A  man  acting  on  the  views  laid  down  in  the 


44 

Bible  on  this  subject,  would  never  make  a  slave  ;  a  man  acting 
on  these  views  would  not  long  retain  a  slave;  and  Christianity, 
by  laying  down  the  doctrine  of  the  essential  equality  of  the 
race,  has  stated  a  doctrine  which  must  sooner  or  later  emanci- 
pate every  human  being  from  bondage."* 

One  of  the  most  graphic  and  thrilling  of  all  the  prophetical 
descriptions  of  the  Messiah's  spiritual  reign  upon  the  earth,  is 
that  in  which  he  speaks  in  his  own  person,  as  "anointed  to 
preach  good  tidings  unto  the  meek ;  "  and  as  "  sent  to  bind  up 
the  broken-hearted,  to  proclaim  liberty  to  the  captives,  and  the 
opening  of  the  prison  to  them  that  are  bound  ;  to  proclaim  the 
acceptable  year  of  the  Lord."  If  we  do  not  greatly  mistake, 
we  have  here  a  foreshadowing  of  the  gospel,  as  the  means  of 
universal  freedom,  and,  of  course,  universal  emancipation. 
And  every  one  will  remember  how  at  Nazareth,  the  whole  of 
the  prediction  was  read  from  "  the  book  of  the  prophet,"  and 
with  what  unutterable  earnestness  "the  eyes  of  all  them  that 
were  in  the  synagogue  were  fastened  on  him,"  who  "  began  to 
say  to  them,  this  day  is  this  Scripture  fulfilled  in  your  ears." 

In  the  last  words  of  the  passage  as  he  read  it,  namely — "  the 
acceptable  year  of  the  Lord" — there  is  an  allusion  most  clearly 
to  "  the  year  of  jubilee,"  that  "  fiftieth  year,"  which  the  people 
of  God  were  to  "  hallow,"  and  in  which  "  liberty  "  was  to  be 
"  proclaimed  'throughout  all  the  land."  The  same  word  for 
"liberty  "  is  used  in  the  words  of  Isaiah,  or  rather  of  the  Mes- 
siah himself,  as  in  the  statute  for  the  year  of  jubilee.  In  Jere- 
miah also  (xxxiv.  8,  9.)  the  same  is  used  to  signify  the  eman- 
cipation of  slaves  ;  referring  to  those  Hebrews,  who  were  held 
by  their  brethren  in  servitude. 

In  the  times  of  the  prophets,  and  in  the  days  of  Christ  and 
the  apostles,  the  idea  of  slavery  was  scarcely  separable  from 
that  of  captivity.  The  Hebrews  excepted,  it  was  the  universal 
custom,  as  we  have  before  stated,  to  make  slaves  of  captives  in 
war.  And  without  war  and  piracy,  the  demand  for  bond- 
servants could  never  have  been  supplied.  Immense  numbers 
of  these  were  enslaved  captives. 

If,  moreover,  instead  of  the  single  word  "captives,"  in  "the 
book  of  the  prophet,"  we  should  read  "enslaved  captives," — 
what  prophecy  can  be  named  which  has  had  a  more  unques- 
tionable or  remarkable  fulfillment, — since  the  Messiah  "ascend- 
ed up  where  he  was  before  "  ?  Such  was  the  spirit  of  the 
gospel  in  the  hearts  of  some  of  the  early  Christians  and  elders 
of  the  church, — that  some  of  them  expended  large  estates,  to 
redeem  captives. — Thus  "  Cyprian  sent  to  the  bishop  of  Nu- 
midia,  in  order  to  redeem  some  captives,  2,500  crowns.  Socra- 

*  Barnes,  pp.  344-6. 


45 

tes,  the  historian,  says,  that  after  the  Romans  had  taken  7,000 
Persian  captives,  Acacius,  bishop  of  Amida,  melted  the  gold  and 
silver  plate  of  his  church,  with  which  he  redeemed  the  captives. 
Ambrose  of  Milan  did  the  same  with  the  furniture  of  his 
church.  It  was  the  only  case  in  which  the  imperial  constitu- 
tions allowed  the  plate  to  be  sold."  (Bib.  Rep.  Oct.  1835.  p. 
433.)  There  were  instancesr  also,  in  which  some  of  high 
standing  and  influence,  not  only  sold  their  property,  but  them- 
selves, for  the  same  purpose  of  delivering  captives  from 
bondage. 

To  what  but  the  influence  of  the  gospel  of  the  Prince  of 
Peace,  can  we  attribute  the  abrogation  and  entire  abandonment 
of  the  custom  of  enslaving  captives  in  war,  among  the  nations 
of  Europe,  during  the  Middle  Ages,  and  after  those  hordes  of 
barbarians  from  Asia  had  become  converts  to  the  faith  of  Him 
"  who  came  not  to  destroy  men's  lives  but  to  save  them  "  ? 
Are  not  all  Christian  nations  at  this  day  the  witnesses,  that  the 
gospel  of  the  Son  of  Go4  has  been  marvellously  glorified,  as  a 
proclamation  of  "deliverance  to  the  captives"? 

The  early  Christians  manifested  the  same  noble  spirit  of  self- 
denial  and  self-sacrifice,  for  the  deliverance  of  all  that  were  in 
the  bonds  of  slavery.  Was  it  not  because  the  spirit  of  Christ 
was  in  them  ?  And  had  it  not  been  for  the  same  spirit,  would 
New  England  have  become  what  it  now  is,  in  regard  to  free- 
dom ?  Or  would  Great  Britain  have  the  glory  of  the  West 
India  emancipation  ? 

From  this  view  of  the  facts  of  history,  at  the  time  the  proph- 
ecy in  the  book  of  Isaiah  was  uttered, — at  the  time  also  of  its 
being  read  as  it  was,  in  the  synagogue  of  Nazareth, — and  in 
the  ages  which  followed, — we  cannot  hesitate  to  consider  the 
idea  of  servitude  as  so  included  in  that  of  captivity,  that  all 
who  are  in  unrighteous  bonds,  may  justly  claim  to  have  been 
remembered  in  that  prophetic  proclamation  of  "  the  acceptable 
year  of  the  Lord."  So  palpably  inconsistent  are  the  precepts 
and  doctrines  of  "  the  glorious  gospel  of  the  blessed  God,"  so 
totally  irreconcilable,  with  the  principle  of  slavery, — that  it 
would  have  been  strange  indeed,  if  it  had  not  been  heralded  in 
prophecy,  as  the  harbinger  and  the  means  of  universal  emanci- 
pation. 

If  it  were  not  for  the  gospel,  we  might  despair  of  the  cause 
of  freedom,  political  or  personal.  We  should  have  no  such 
bow  of  promise,  as  now  greets  our  vision. 

He  who  so  preached  "  as  one  having  authority,"  "  knew 
what  was  in  man."  With  him  "  a  thousand  years  were  as  one 
day."  What  was  to  be  attempted  or  accomplished  immediately, 
and  what  was  left  to  "  the  fullness  of  time"  in  the  future,  when 
his  "way  should  be  prepared,"  could  have  been  no  secret. 
5* 


46 

Even  to  his  disciples,  who  had  been  so  long  under  his  immedi- 
ate instructions,  he  was  obliged  to  say  : — "  1  have  yet  many 
things  to  say  to  you,  but  ye  cannot  bear  them  now.  But  when 
he,  the  Spirit  of  truth  is  come,  he  will  guide  you  into  all  truth  ; 
and  he  will  show  you  things  to  come."  How  much  more, 
then,  would  others  have  need  of  gradual  illumination,  in  order 
that  they  might  be  prepared  to  acknowledge  every  just  right  of 
their  fellow-men,  cease  from  all  wrongs,  and  redress  all  griev- 
ances ? 

By  diffusing  the  gospel  in  its  leading  principles  and  precepts, 
among  all  classes  of  people,  a  quiet  and  bloodless  revolution 
might  be  accomplished,  in  regard  to  slavery,  to  war,  to  despo- 
tism, and  to  all  other  gigantic  forms  of  evil,  in  the  social  and 
civil  relations  of  mankind.  But,  as  it  has  been  justly  said,  "  if 
it  had  forbidden  the  evil,  instead  of  subverting  the  principle  ; 
if  it  had  proclaimed  the  unlawfulness  of  slavery  and  taught 
slaves  to  resist  the  oppression  of  their  masters ;  it  would  in- 
stantly have  arrayed  the  two  parties  in  deadly  hostility,  through- 
out the  civilized  world  ;  its  announcement  would  have  been 
the  signal  of  servile  war;  arid  the  very  name  of  the  Christian 
religion  would  have  been  forgotten  amidst  the  agitations  of 
bloodshed.  The  fact,  that  under  these  circumstances,  the  gos- 
pel does  not  forbid  slavery,  affords  no  reason  to  suppose,  that  it 
does  not  mean  to  prohibit  it  ;  much  less  does  it  afford  ground 
for  belief,  that  Jesus  Christ  intended  to  authorize  it."  * 

"  The  gospel  is  a  universal  rule.  It  prescribes  no  moral  duty 
for  one  man,  and  excuses  from  that  duty  another,  when  both 
are  under  the  same  circumstances.  If  it  prescribed  the  duty  of 
manumitting  their  slaves  to  Christian  masters,  it  must  have 
prescribed  it  to  all  masters  ;  that  is,  it  must  have  adopted  that 
other  mode  of  teaching  by  precept,  instead  of  teaching  by  prin- 
ciple. It  therefore  left  the  whole  matter  to  the  operation  of 
principle.  In  all  this  may  be  seen  the  benevolence  and  long- 
mindedness  of  the  Deity.  God  treats  his  intelligent  creatures 
according  to  the  nature  which  he  has  given  them.  He  reveals 
his  will.  He  promulgates  truth  of  universal  efficacy,  but  fre- 
quently allows  long  time  to  elapse,  before  the  effect  of  it  ap- 
pears, in  order  that  the  effect  may  be  the  more  radical  and  com- 
prehensive. "-J- 

The  apostles  were  all  freemen.  They  could  have  said  with 
no  unsuitable  exultation,  "  We  be  Abraham's  seed,  and  were 
never  in  bondage  to  any  man."  And  imperfectly  as  they  may 
have  comprehended  their  Master's  will,  when  they  received 
their  final  charge,  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  how  can  it  be  sup- 
posed, that  they  went  forth  to  preach,  as  the  gospel,  a  system 

*  Wayland.  t  Letters  to  Dr.  Fuller. 


47 

of  doctrines  and  duties,  that  would  sanction  the  slavery  which 
they  found  in  Asia,  Greece  and  Rome,  or  the  slavery  which 
now  exists  in  the  United  States  ?  And  did  Paul,  who  was 
afterwards  added  to  their  number,  and  to  whom  the  rights  of 
Roman  freedom  were  so  dear, — ever  preach  or  indite  a  single 
sentence,  which  was  meant  to  be  understood  as  an  approval  or 
justification,  either  of  ancient  or  modern  slave-holding? 

For  our  answer  to  questions  like  these,  we  are  happy  to  have 
been  so  anticipated  by  the  lofty  and  indignant  protestation  of 
one,  who,  "  though  dead,"  will  long  continue  to  "  speak." 

"  Had  Napoleon,  on  capturing  Berlin  or  Vienna,  doomed  most 
or  the  whole  of  their  inhabitants  to  bondage  ;  had  he  seized  on 
venerable  matrons,  the  mothers  of  illustrious  men,  who  were 
reposing,  after  virtuous  lives,  in  the  bosom  of  grateful  families; 
had  he  seized  on  the  delicate,  refined,  beautiful  young  woman, 
whose  education  had  prepared  her  to  grace  the  sphere  in  which 
God  had  placed  her,  and  over  all  whose  prospects  the  freshest 
hopes  and  most  glowing  imaginations  of  early  life  were  breath- 
ed ;  had  he  seized  on  the  minister  of  religion,  the  man  of 
science,  the  man  of  genius,  the  sage,  the  guides  of  the  world  ; 
had  he  scattered  these  through  the  slave-markets  of  the  world, 
and  transferred  them  to  the  highest  bidders  at  public  auction, 
the  men  to  be  converted  into  instruments  of  slavish  toil,  the 
women  into  intruments  of  lust,  and  both  to  endure  whatever 
indignities  and  tortures  absolute  power  can  inflict,  we  should 
then  have  had  a  picture,  in  the  present  age,  of  slavery  as  it 
existed  in  the  time  of  Paul.  Such  slavery,  we  are  told,  was 
sanctioned  by  the  apostle  !  Such,  we  are  told,  he  pronounced 
to  be  morally  right !  Had  Napoleon  sent  some  cargoes  of  these 
victims  to  these  shores,  we  might  have  bought  them,  and  de- 
graded the  noblest  beings  to  our  lowest  uses,  and  might  have 
cited  Paul  to  testify  to  our  innocence  !  Were  an  infidel  to 
bring  this  charge  against  the  apostle,  we  should  say  that  he 
was  laboring  in  his  vocation  ;  but  that  a  professed  Christian 
should  so  insult  this  sainted  philanthropist,  this  martyr  to  truth 
and  benevolence,  is  a  sad  proof  of  the  power  of  slavery  to  blind 
its  supporters  to  the  plainest  truth."  * 

To  all  this  we  respond  our  most  hearty  assent.  A  reply  has 
been  attempted  with  an  ability  and  spirit  worthy  of  a  better 
cause  and  a  more  honorable  purpose. f  But  in  vain  will  any 
man,  be  his  nominal  or  real  "vocation"  what  it  may, — or 
whether  an  apologist  of  slavery  or  an  apologist  for  its  apologists, 
in  vain  will  he  "  labor  "  to  vindicate  the  lawfulness  of  slave- 
holding,  by  the  instructions  and  conduct  of  the  great  apostle  to 
the  Gentiles. 

*  Channing's  Works,  vol.  II.  t  Biblical  Repertory. 


48 

Wherever  Paul  went,  in  countries  out  of  Judea,  he  must 
have  found  a  population  in  which  the  slaves  generally  out- 
numbered the  freemen.  This  was  certainly  true  in  the  large 
cities.  The  same  gospel  was  preached  to  Jew  and  Greek,  to 
bond  and  free.  As  both  of  the  latter  classes,  as  well  as  the  for- 
mer, were  among  the  hearers,  we  can  imagine  no  reason  why 
some  slave-holders  should  not  have  been  found  among  the  con- 
verts. We  cannot  doubt  that  there  were  "  believing  masters," 
whom  converted  slaves  regarded  as  their  own  "  brethren,"  in 
the  bonds  of  a  common  service  to  a  common  Lord  and  Master. 
(1  Tim.  vi.  2;  Eph.  vi.  9  ;  Col.  iv.  1  ;  Philemon.) 

The  evidence  is  to  our  minds  perfectly  conclusive,  that  some 
of  the  members  of  the  churches  gathered  by  Paul  and  his  asso- 
ciates, were  admitted  to  the  fellowship  of  kindred  in  Christ, 
without  being  required  to  emancipate  their  slaves,  as  a  proof  of 
their  conversion  and  a  condition  of  church-membership.  There 
may  have  been  much  of  private  counsel,  and  much  may  have 
been  done,  or  have  been  expected  to  be  done,  for  the  advantage, 
if  not  the  manumission  of  bond-servants,  concerning  which 
there  is  neither  record  nor  allusion.  Instruction  of  which  we 
have  heard  nothing  was  unquestionably  given  in  regard  to  other 
subjects,  as,  for  example,  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  day,  in- 
stead of  the  seventh  day. 

But  let  it  be  admitted  that  the  relation  of  master  and  slave, 
in  respect  to  natural  right  or  moral  principle,  was  not  at  any 
time  made  a  subject  of  public  discourse  or  of  private  counsel. 
Could  not  the  apostles  have  done  all,  which  is  known,  while 
yet  neither  approving  nor  countenancing  the  system  or  the 
principle  of  slavery  ?  If  they  could  not, — where  is  "  the  man 
of  God  "  now  living,  who  is  not  chargeable  with  duplicity,  dis- 
honesty and  hypocrisy, — while  endeavoring  to  be  "  made  all 
things  to  all  men, — that  "  he  "  might  by  all  means  save  some  ?" 

Masters  and  servants,  being  members  together  of  the  same 
spiritual  body,  met  at  the  place  of  worship  and  at  the  table  of 
the  Lord  especially,  as  upon  the  same  level.  They  were  taught 
by  the  Scriptures,  by  word  of  mouth,  and  by  Epistles,  the  same 
confession  of  faith,  and  the  same  rules  of  "newness  of  life." 
Whatever  related  to  the  duties  of  husbands  and  wives,  parents 
and  children,  included  servants  as  well  as  masters.  But  how 
could  servants  discharge  those  duties,  unless  their  masters  were 
to  treat  them,  not  as  when  all  were  together  in  bondage  to 
"the  god  of  this  world,"  but  as  men  who  had  become  the 
Lord's  freemen  ;  and  who,  although  not  formally  released  from 
the  state  of  servitude,  in  which  they  were  "  called  "  to  the 
'liberty  of  children  of  God,'  yet  found  themselves  in  a  most 
enviable  condition,  as  compared  with  others,  and  with  them- 
selves also,  previous  to  the  conversion  of  their  masters  ? 


49 

That  such  was  really  the  change  of  condition  in  many  in- 
stances, if  not  invariably,  and  that  servants  were  to  be,  and 
were  regarded  as  "above  servants"  and  as  "brethren  beloved" 
by  such  masters  as  Philemon,  is  a  natural  conclusion  from 
Paul's  procedure  in  the  case  of  Onesimus.  The  apostle  would 
doubtless  have  exposed  himself  to  the  laws  of  the  Roman  em- 
pire, if  he  had  acted  as  if  harboring  a  runaway  slave  ;  and  such 
we  are  willing  to  concede,  this  Onesimus  was,  although  there 
is  some  ground  for  a  question  in  the  premises.  But  if  Onesi- 
mus had  not  preferred  to  return  to  the  house  of  Philemon,  we 
know  not  how  Paul  could  have  "sent  him"  thither.  Not  un- 
likely it  was  his  own  proposal,  and  the  aid  of  Paul  may  have 
been  solicited  to  secure  for  him  a  favorable  reception.  There 
may  have  been  circumstances  and  reasons  in  view  of  both, 
which  do  not  at  all  appear  in  the  statements  or  allusions  of  the 
Epistle,  which  has  given  occasion  for  such  conflicting  com- 
ments. 

But  who  can  read  that  Epistle,  without  seeing,  if  he  will  can- 
didly examine  it,  that  in  every  part  the  writer  assumes,  that 
Philemon  is  a  Christian,  who  would  gladly  receive  Onesimus, 
now  himself  converted,  and  regard  him  as  a  servant,  in  name 
and  form  only  ?  Does  not  the  whole  spirit  of  it  seem  to  take 
for  granted,  that  Philemon  is  fully  aware  of  the  new  mode  of 
relation  to  Onesimus,  which  had  sprung  from  their  mutual 
bonds  of  fraternal  love  ?  When  Paul  said,  "  For  perhaps  he 
departed  for  a  season,  that  thou  shouldst  receive  him  forever," 
what  hinders  that  we  should  perceive  here  a  most  beautiful, 
though  indirect  reference  to  their  enduring  relationship  in  the 
world  to  come  ?  And  when  he  adds,  "  Not  now  as  a  servant, 
but  above  a  servant,  a  brother  beloved,  especially  to  me,  but 
how  much  more  unto  thee,  both  in  the  flesh  and  in  the  Lord," 
how  is  it  possible,  that  he  could  have  the  least  idea  that  Onesi- 
mus was  going  back,  to  be  treated  otherwise  than  most  kindly, 
as  one  of  the  family  of  Philemon,  in  whose  house  he  may  have 
been  born,  and  also  as  one  who  had  rights  as  a  Christian,  which 
would  certainly  ensure  such  an  acknowledgment  of  his  rights 
as  a  man,  as  might  soon,  if  not  immediately,  lead  to  his  dis- 
charge from  servitude  ?  There  may  be  no  sufficient  historical 
ground  for  the  tradition,  that  he  received  his  freedom,  and  that 
he  was  afterwards  a  bishop  of  Berea ; — but  the  tradition  has 
every  probability  in  its  favor.  At  a  later  period  "  when  a  slave 
became,  with  the  consent  of  his  master,  a  minister  of  the  gos- 
pel, he  was,  by  the  very  act,  regarded  as  emancipated." 

In  any  event,  the  conduct  of  Paul  affords  no  sanction  of  the 
principle  of  slavery.  Let  all  slave-holders  feel  and  act  towards 
their  slaves,  as  Paul  enjoined  upon  Philemon,  or  rather  pre- 
sumed, that  of  course,  he  would, — and  the  slave-holding  system 


50 

would  at  once  be  transformed  in  all  its  features  and  constituent 
properties  ;  and,  at  no  distant  day,  there  would  be  such  a 
jubilee  of  emancipation,  as  the  world  has  never  known. 

It  certainly  was  neither  lawful  nor  expedient  for  Paul,  or  any 
of  the  apostles,  to  teach  any  such  doctrine,  as  that  slaves  ought 
not  to  obey  their  masters  ;  and  that  if  their  masters  would  not 
set  them  free,  they  would  be  justified  in  running  away.  It 
would  not  only  have  aggravated  the  evils  of  slavery,  in  thou- 
sands of  instances,  but  not  a  preacher  of  the  gospel  would  have 
been  suffered  to  go  at  large,  with  any  such  doctrine,  if  he  was 
permitted  by  the  civil  authorities  to  live,  any  longer  than  the 
time  necessary  for  his  trial  and  condemnation.  What  would 
be  the  doom  of  any  such  preacher,  at  the  present  day,  in  any  of 
the  slave-holding  States  of  the  South  ? 

One  of  the  natural  consequences  of  the  relation  of  equality 
and  fraternity  in  the  Lord,  was  the  temptation  of  withholding 
that  obedience  and  honor  which  servants  had  before  rendered 
to  their  masters.  And  whether  or  not  they  had  "  believing 
masters,"  they  might  be  so  exalted  in  their  own  esteem,  by  the 
moral  distinctions  of  their  participation  in  the  hopes  and  glories 
of  the  high  calling  of  God,  that  they  would  not  be  inaccessible 
to  insidious  suggestions  of  their  personal  consequence;  nor  slow 
to  make  manifest  a  spirit  of  discontent,  or  of  rebelliousness, 
which  would  operate  most  unfavorably  for  the  character  and 
progress  of  the  gospel.  From  such  sources  or  some  others, 
there  undoubtedly  was  an  urgent  occasion  for  injunctions,  like 
that  in  the  1st  Epistle  to  Timothy :  "  Let  as  many  servants  as 
are  under  the  yoke  count  their  masters  worthy  of  all  honor, 
that  the  name  of  God  and  his  doctrine  be  not  blasphemed. 
And  they  that  have  believing  masters,  let  them  not  despise 
them,  because  they  are  brethren ;  but  rather  do  them  service, 
because  they  are  faithful  and  beloved,  partakers  of  the  benefit." 
(vi.  1,2.) 

In  the  1st  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  (vii.  20-24. )  it  is  said  : 
"  Let  every  man  abide  in  the  same  calling  wherein  he  was 
called.  Art  thou  called  being  a  servant  ?  care  not  for  it ;  but  if 
thou  mayest  be  made  free,  use  it  rather.  For  he  that  is  called 
in  the  Lord,  being  a  servant,  is  the  Lord's  freeman  ;  likewise 
also  he  that  is  called,  being  free,  is  Christ's  servant.  Ye  are 
bought  with  a  price  ;  be  not  ye  the  servants  of  men.  Brethren, 
let  every  man,  wherein  he  was  called,  therein  abide  with  God." 
Of  the  same  import  and  for  the  same  purpose  are  the  other  pas- 
sages, in  the  Epistles,  upon  the  same  subject.  (Col.  iii.  22-25  ; 
Tit.  ii.  9-10.  Also  1st  of  Peter  ii.  18-20.)  And  are  we  to 
consider  such  injunctions,  as  apostolical  authority  for  slave- 
holding  ? 

When  did  Paul  ever  say,  Servants,  obey  your  masters  in 


51 

the  Lord,  for  this  is  right  ?  And  why  did  he  not  speak  thus, 
as  he  did  when  inculcating  filial  obedience  ?  If  it  was  right 
in  itself,  and  a  moral  duty  according  to  "  the  law  and  the  pro- 
phets," why  did  he  not  speak  in  the  same  manner,  as  to  chil- 
dren ? 

The  motive,  in  every  instance,  was  not  that  of  obligation  to 
the  master,  as  if  of  right  a  slave-holder  ;  but  that  which  arose 
from  the  relation  of  servants  to  the  "  Lord  of  all."  They  were 
to  obey,  that  '  the  name  of  God  and  his  doctrine  be  not  blas- 
phemed,' ( in  singleness  of  heart,  as  unto  Christ ; '  '  that  they 
may  adorn  the  doctrine  of  God  our  Saviour  in  all  thitigs.' 
How  does  the  principle  of  obligation  here  differ,  from  that 
which  should  constrain  us  to  "resist  not  evil,"  and  to  "pray 
for  them  which  despitefully  use"  us  "and  persecute"  us? 
When  smitten  on  the  right  cheek,  if  we  turn  the  other  also, 
do  we  thereby  confess  ourselves  justly  smitten  ?  We  may  suffer 
patiently,  for  the  honor  of  God  and  the  gospel,  what  we  know 
to  be  the  most  flagrant  injustice  and  inhuman  oppression.  And 
we  may  counsel  others  to  suffer  in  like  manner,  if  need  be, 
"  for  conscience  toward  God." 

It  is  at  least  somewhat  remarkable,  that  if  the  master  had  a 
right  to  be  a  master,  such  as  could  be  recognized,  independent- 
ly of  the  legal  title  which  he  held, —  the  slave  should  never 
have  been  exhorted  by  an  appeal  to  such  a  right.  But  if  there 
is  any  reference  or  allusion  to  the  right  of  the  master,  as  such, 
we  have  failed  to  discover  it. 

In  all  their  instructions,  from  first  to  last,  the  apostles  appear 
to  have  aimed  to  promote  a  thorough  conversion  of  every  man 
to  righteousness  and  true  holiness  ;  as  if  such  conversion  would 
ultimately  associate  with  its  results,  as  consequence  or  accom- 
paniment, all  that  was  most  needful  in  the  existing  circumstan- 
ces of  individuals  and  communities.  Thus,  while  accounting 
freedom  a  great  privilege,  and  a  natural  right  indisputably,  they 
could,  in  all  godly  sincerity  and  with  the  truest  friendship  for 
the  slave,  exhort  him  to  make  the.  greatest  exertion  to  please 
his  master,  in  every  thing  which  his  duty  to  God  required  or 
permitted  ;  and  not  to  be  discontented,  if  he  should  be  com- 
pelled to  remain  in  servitude.  If  he  could  have  freedom,  let 
him  embrace  it,  as  a  state  most  desirable.  Yet  to  be  a  freeman 
in  Christ  was  of  vastly  greater  importance.  And  as  his  spiritual 
redemption  had  been  already  purchased  at  the  price  of  the  blood 
of  the  Son  of  God,  let  him  consider  himself  exalted  as  a  servant 
of  God,  and  the  "  Lord's  freeman,"  rather  than  depressed  and 
humiliated  by  bondage  to  his  fellow-man. 

Such  injunctions  and  exhortations  were  perfectly  consistent 
with  an  inward  abhorrence  of  the  principle  of  slave-holding. 
And  the  same  may  be  said  of  those  addressed  to  the  masters 


62 

themselves.  They  were  required  to  discharge  their  duties  to 
their  servants,  with  as  conscientious  a  regard  for  the  will  of 
God  and  the  love  of  Christ,  as  servants  were  required  to  exer- 
cise towards  them.  "  Ye  masters,  do  the  same  things  unto 
them,  forbearing  threatening;  knowing  that  your  Master  also  is 
in  heaven  ;  neither  is  there  respect  of  persons  with  him."  (Eph. 
vi.  9.)  And  again  the  charge  was,  "Masters  give  unto  your 
servants  that  which  is  just  and  equal,  knowing  that  ye  also 
have  a  Master  in  heaven."  (Col.  iv.  1.)  This  charge  to  those 
in  the  church  of  Colosse  immediately  follows  the  exhortation 
to  servants,  encouraging  them  to  look  for  the  reward  of  fidelity 
to  their  masters,  in  that  inheritance  which  was  theirs,  as  ser- 
vants of  the  Lord  Christ.  "  But  he  that  doeth  wrong,"  it  is 
significantly  declared,  both  for  servants  and  masters, — "  shall 
receive  for  the  wrong  which  he  hath  done:  and  THEKE  is  NO 

RESPECT  OF   PER50NS." 

Notice  also  the  exhortation  subjoined,  which  must  be  under- 
stood as  addressed  to  all,  but  would  seem  to  have  been  pecu- 
liarly intended  to  touch  the  sympathies  of  masters.  "  Continue 
in  prayer,  and  watch  in  the  same  with  thanksgiving ;  withal 
praying  also  for  us,  that  God  would  open  unto  us  a  door  of  ut- 
terance, to  speak  the  mystery  of  Christ,  for  which  I  am  also  in 
bonds :  that  I  may  make  it  manifest  as  I  ought  to  speak. 
Walk  in  wisdom  toward  them  that  are  without,  redeeming  the 
time."  The  exceeding  delicacy  and  tenderness  of  the  allusion 
to  the  "  bonds  "  in  which  the  apostle  himself  was,  because  a 
faithful  servant  of  Christ,  is  equalled  only  by  the  exquisite  ele- 
gance and  urbanity  of  the  Epistle  to  Philemon.  And  surely  no 
one  of  the  servants  in  the  church  at  Colosse  could  have  had  any 
question  of  the  apostle's  most  cordial  respect  for  them,  as  well 
as  sympathizing  interest  in  all  their  temporal  privations  and 
hardships.  As  they  heard  his  Epistle  read,  they  would  hear  him 
speak  of  Onesimus,  as  "a  faithful  and  beloved  brother,"  and 
one  of  themselves, — and  see  Onesimus  also,  face  to  face, — who 
had  been  sent  in  company  with  Tychicus,  that  "he  might 
know  their  estate  and  comfort  their  hearts."  They  would  have 
been  most  unreasonable  to  have  expected  more  from  him,  how- 
ever intolerable  might  have  been  their  servitude. 

There  is  a  consideration,  also,  which  we  deem  worthy  of  no 
small  account,  in  estimating  thje  desirableness  of  freedom  to  the 
slave.  It  should  be  remembered,  that  much  commotion  had 
been  already  made  by  the  news  of  the  gospel ;  and  many 
thought  that  the  "  doctrine  according  to  godliness"  must  be 
resisted  and  crushed,  or  it  would  "  turn  the  world  upside 
down."  Dreadful  persecutions  had  already  been  experienced, 
and  there  was  an  evident  expectation,  that  more  "perilous 
times"  (2  Tim.  iii.  1.)  were  about  to  come.  If  such  was  the 


53 

"  distress  "  then  "  present,"  that  the  apostle  advised  all,  who 
were  unmarried,  not  to  marry,  if  they  would  have  the  less  of 
"  trouble  in  the  flesh;  "  if  such  were  the  uncertainties  of  all 
earthly  things,  that  it  "  remained,  that  both  they  that  had 
wives,"  should  "  be  as  though  they  had  none,  and  they  that 
rejoiced,  as  though  they  rejoiced  not,  and  they  that  bought,  as 
though  they  possessed  not ; " — is  it  improbable,  that  from  the 
whole  aspect  of  the  "  fashion  of  the  world  "  as  then  before  him 
and  as  "  passing  away,"  he  could  not  but  feel,  that  the  question 
of  personal  freedom  was  of  comparatively  little  moment  to  any 
one,  in  whom  CHRIST  had  been  formed  "the  hope  of  glory  ?" 
Vastly  different  are  the  circumstances  of  slaves  at  the  present 
day  !  And  even  in  the  primitive  churches,  freedom  soon  came 
to  be  esteemed  an  invaluable  privilege.  Emancipation  was 
frequently  solemnized  in  the  church  with  very  impressive  cere- 
monies. 

In  times  of  persecution  the  slave  would  obviously  be  less  ex- 
posed to  die  as  a  martyr  by  popular  violence,  or  in  the  regular 
course  of  law.  The  master  would  be  the  victim,  in  preference. 
And  to  both  masters  and  slaves,  who  had  hope  in  Christ,  how 
animating  must  have  been  those  sublime  views  of  "the  liberty 
of  the  children  of  God,"  when  they  have  left  the  body,  and 
when  the  "  redemption  of  the  body  shall  be  consummated  at 
the  resurrection  of  the  just !  "  (Rom.  viii.  ;  1  Cor.  xv.) 

But  suppose,  that  it  was  a  hard  struggle  for  the  slave,  to  re- 
main quietly  and  contentedly,  if  he  saw  no  prospect  of  being 
free  from  his  master,  until  the  grave  was  opened  to  receive  his 
mortal  nature.  With  all  that  he  may  have  had  to  endure  and 
all  that  he  may  have  needed  of  the  graces  of  meekness  and 
patience, — we  are  not  sure,  that  "  the  believing  master  "  did 
not  have  the  bitterest  experience,  and  did  not  need  the  largest 
measure  of  the  virtues  of  "  the  new  man,"  that  he  might  do 
the  will  of  God.  The  natural  rights  of  the  slave  being  fully 
admitted,  there  would  yet  be  questions,  upon  which  "the 
flesh"  and  "the  spirit"  would  have  not  a  little  of  sharp  con- 
tention. Were  not  men  in  those  circumstances,  to  be  instruct- 
ed, and  "besought,  by  the  meekness  and  gentleness  of  Christ?" 

Although  not  a  word  may  have  been  spoken  upon  the  rights 
of  the  master  or  the  wrongs  of  the  servant,  it  must  not  be  for- 
gotten, that  Paul  has  classified  "«mew-s£ea/ers,"  with  the  most 
abandoned  and  abominable  of  the  workers  of  iniquity,  and 
enemies  of  all  righteousness.  (1  Tim.  i.  10.)  The  moral  dis- 
tance was  not  so  great  between  the  kidnapper  and  the  slave- 
dealer,  that  both  of  them  alike  may  not  have  been  denoted  by 
the  term,  which  he  employed.  Neither  was  the  distance  so 
great,  certainly  in  many  cases,  between  the  slave-dealer  and 
the  slave-holder,  as  not  unnaturally  to  occasion  in  Christian 
6 


54 

masters  some  very  anxious  "searchings  of  heart."  What 
would  have  been  the  effect  of  any  other  treatment,  than  that 
which  they  received  from  their  spiritual  fathers  and  instructors? 
What  if  Paul  had  not  been  "gentle  among"  them,  "  even  as 
a  nurse  cherisheth  her  children  ?  "  How  could  they,  unmoved, 
receive  injunctions  to  "  give  unto  their  servants  that  which  is 
just  and  equal,'.'  while  so  solemnly  reminded  of  the  judgment- 
seat  of  Christ,  with  whom  "  is  no  respect  of  persons,"  and  so 
affectionately  solicited  to  pray  for  the  opening  of  a  door  of  ut- 
terance, to  speak  the  mystery  of  Christ  for  which  also  the  apos- 
tle was  in  those  "  bonds,"  and  wearing  that  "  chain  ?  "  How 
could  they  meet  their  servants  upon  the  basis  of  equality  as 
freemen  and  brethren  in  the  Lord  ;  how  co-operate  in  seeking 
the  salvation  of  others,  as  well  as  promoting  their  own,  and  en- 
deavor, in  unity  of  faith  to  fulfill  their  mutual  responsibilities  of 
love  to  God  and  love  to  man  ; — and  yet  never  have  a  thought 
of  the  inevitable  tendency  of  such  a  relationship  and  fellowship 
to  "  break  every  yoke  "  but  "  the  yoke  "  of  Christ  ?  As  they 
became  more  and  more  "enlightened"  in  the  "eyes"  of  their 
"  understanding,"  how  could  they  fail  to  see  that  they  were 
not  "  giving  that  which  is  just  and  equal,"  unless  they  gave 
their  servants  their  freedom,  at  an  early  day  ;  or  retained  them, 
regarding  them  as  if  "  hired  servants,"  and  having  no  wish  or 
purpose  to  uphold  and  perpetuate  an  institution,  so  contrary  to 
the  natural  and  the  moral  rights  of  every  human  being  ? 

That  the  effects  of  the  gospel  were  most  happy,  in  amelio- 
rating the  condition  of  slaves,  in  different  countries,  where  the 
holy  influence  of  its  principles  was  permitted  silently  to  operate, 
is  amply  proved  in  what  remains  to  us  of  the  history  of  the 
primitive  churches.  Much  was  to  be  done,  a  labor  of  years 
and  of  generations  was  to  be  accomplished, — before  the  right 
of  slave-holding,  which  was  so  taken  for  granted  among  all 
heathen  nations,  could  be  openly  resisted,  and  the  institution 
of  slavery,  in  its  principle,  be  assailed,  with  the  least  hope  of 
success.  And  it  is  not  easy  for  any  one  to  estimate  the  magni- 
tude, the  immensity  of  the  work,  which  Christianity  had  to 
perform,  before  idolatry  could  be  extirpated,  and  slavery  abol- 
ished, in  the  civilized  world.  Both  the  one  and  the  other 
bowed  before  it.  And  the  glory  of  the  moral  triumph,  un- 
counted millions  of  "  sons  and  daughters  of  the  Lord  Almigh- 
ty "  will  celebrate,  through  everlasting  ages. 

It  could  have  been  no  time-serving  policy,  no  fear  of  personal 
consequences,  that  could  have  had  influence  upon  Paul,  in 
treating  as  he  did,  the  trying  subject  of  slavery.  He  did  what 
was  expedient,  according  to  the  "  wisdom  that  is  from  above," 
which  "is  first  pure,  then  peaceable,  gentle,  and  easy  to  be  en- 
treated, full  of  mercy  and  good  fruits,  without  partiality  and  with- 


55 

out  hypocrisy  ;  "  not  that  which  "  is  earthly,  sensual,  devilish," 
with  "envying  and  strife,  confusion  and  every  evil  work." 
He  "  went  about  doing  good,"  and  followed  in  close  proximity 
the  steps  of  his  adorable  Leader  "who  did  no  sin,  neither  was 
guile  found  in  his  mouth." 

And  if  there  is  to  be  any  impeachment  of  his  integrity  and 
honesty,  on  the  ground  that  he  ought  to  have  done  far  other- 
wise, than  he  did,  if  really  opposed  to  the  principle  of  slave- 
holding,  as  in  utter  conflict  with  the  principles  of  the  gospel ; — 
then  it  would,  perhaps,  be  not  inappropriate  to  inquire,  how 
such  impeachment  could  be  issued,  without  a  direct  imputation 
upon  the  veracity  and  holiness  of  "  God  only  wise," — in  the 
method  and  means,  which  have  distinguished  the  whole  course 
of  his  providence  and  grace. 

"  In  trust  with  the  gospel,"  the  apostle  was  accustomed  to 
"  speak,  not  as  pleasing  men,  but  God  ;  "  "  neither  at  any  time 
used  flattering  words,  nor  a  cloak  of  covetousness ;  nor  of  men 
sought  glory."  If  there  ever  was  a  man,  who  is  entitled  to 
everlasting  remembrance  and  gratitude  for  his  noble  deeds, 
when  in  the  fear  of  God,  a  fearless  champion  of  human  rights 
and  liberties, — that  man  was  Paul,  the  apostle  to  the  Gentiles. 
And  to  interpret  his  words,  or  his  example,  as  authority  for  the 
right  of  slave-holding,  is,  as  we  must  be  allowed  to  say,  a  libel 
upon  his  memory,  of  which  no  one  would  intentionally  be 
guilty,  unless  willing  also  to  despise  and  blaspheme  the  gospel 
and  the  name  of  "  the  great  God  and  our  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ." 

Far  be  it  from  us  to  "  bring  railing  accusation."  We  would 
"deal  kindly"  while  we  "deal  truly"  with  all,  who  have  the 
immediate  responsibility  of  action,  by  means  and  measures  for 
the  removal  of  slavery  from  this  land.  We  would  not  forget 
the  example  of  the  founders  of  the  churches  of  Christ  among 
the  slave-holding  Gentiles.  Neither  can  we  forget,  that  the  cir- 
cumstances in  which  those  churches  were  established,  were 
very  different  from  those  in  which  Christian  churches  now  exist 
in  our  Southern  States.  Most  sincerely  do  we  believe,  that,  if 
all  Christians  in  these  States  were  to  "  do  with  their  might " 
what  they  can  find  to  be  done, — the  love  of  Christ  constraining 
them  ; — if  they  would  detach  themselves  from  all  personal  con- 
nection with  the  system  of  slavery,  so  that  their  influence 
should  not  "  throw  the  sacred  shield  of  religion  over  so  great 
an  evil,  there  is  no  public  sentiment  in  this  land — there  could 
be  none  created,  that  would  resist  the  power  of  such  testimony. 
There  is  no  power  out  of  the  church,  that  could  sustain  slavery 
an  hour,  if  it  were  not  sustained  in  it.  Not  a  blow  need  be 
struck.  Not  an  unkind  word  need  be  uttered.  No  man's  mo- 
tive need  be  impugned  ;  no  man's  proper  rights  invaded.  All 


56 

that  is  needful  is,  for  each  Christian  man,  and  for  every  Chris- 
tian church,  to  stand  up  in  the  sacred  majesty  of  such  a  solemn 
testimony  ;  to  free  themselves  from  all  connection  with  the 
evil,  and  utter  a  calm  and  deliberate  voice  to  the  world,  AND 

THE   WORK  WILL  BE  DONE."* 

Christianity  demands  the  use  of  every  available  means  for 
the  intellectual  and  moral  improvement  of  all  orders  and  classes 
of  men.  It  enforces  a  most  sacred  respect  for  the  purity  of 
woman,  the  rights  and  duties  and  privileges  of  husband  and 
wife,  parent  and  child.  It  can  sanction  no  laws,  usages  or  ex- 
pedients, designed  to  keep  men  in  ignorance  or  degradation,  of 
any  kind  or  degree.  How  then  can  any  Christian  desire  the 
continuance  of  the  slave-holding  system  in  our  country?  How 
can  any  speak  in  its  defence,  or  publish  apologies  in  its  behalf, 
— the  whole  tendency  of  which  is  to  prolong,  if  not  to  perpet- 
uate the  evils  and  abominations,  which  will  never  cease,  while 
the  system  is  sustained,  and  which  Christianity  can  no  more 
cherish,  than  it  can  sanctify  adultery  and  murder? 

The  Bible  is  for  the  slave,  no  less  than  for  the  master.  Every 
word  of  God  is  to  the  slave  as  a  man,  as  much  as  to  any  other 
man  living.  And  after  all  that  could  be  said  of  the  opportuni- 
ties afforded  to  learn  the  great  truths  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  it 
is  most  certain,  that  there  are  obligations  implied  in  the  doc- 
trines and  precepts  of  the  gospel,  which  it  is  impossible  for 
slaves  to  fulfill. 


We  cannot  pursue  this  investigation,  consistently  with  the 
limits  to  which  we  may  be  expected  to  confine  ourselves.  It 
would  be  too  much  to  anticipate  the  entire  acquiescence  of  the 
more  than  five  hundred  members  of  this  Convention  of  Congre- 
gational Ministers  in  every  sentiment  or  form  of  expression  ;  but 
we  shall  be  much  disappointed,  if  the  premises  upon  which  we 
confidently  rest  our  conclusions  do  not  receive  a  response  from 
this  body,  which  will  give  to  this  part  of  our  Report  the  moral 
power  of  their  unanimous  concurrence  and  their  cordial  appro- 
bation. 

Such  views  of  the  Scriptures,  together  with  an  ardent  love 
of  liberty,  have  tended,  from  an  early  period  in  the  history  of 
the  American  people,  to  concentrate  the  thoughts  and  the  efforts 
of  enlightened  and  conscientious  men,  and,  indeed,  of  whole 
communities  in  the  free  States,  in  opposition  to  slavery. 

A  brief  account  of  what  has  been  done  under  these  influ- 
ences for  the  extinction  of  slavery,  not  only  in  our  own  lands 


57 

but  in  other  parts  of  the  world — together  with  some  suggestions 
in  regard  to  methods  of  producing  increased  efforts  in  favor  of 
universal-  emancipation,  forms  a  part  of  the  analysis  of  our 
subject. 


In  February,  1638,  there  came  to  Massachusetts  from  Tortu- 
gas,  "a  cargo  of  cotton,  tobacco,  salt  and  negroes."  How 
many  of  these  last  there  were,  is  not  known.  Neither  have 
we  found  any  record  of  the  feelings,  which  were  expressed  in 
regard  to  them  ;  although  there  can  be  no  doubt,  that  they 
were  brought  as  slaves.*  But  in  the  Body  of  Laws  adopted  by 
the  General  Court  of  Massachusetts,  in  1641,  it  is  declared, 
that  "  there  shall  never  be  any  bond  slaverie,  villinage,  or  cap- 
tivitie  amongst  us,  unless  it  be  lawfull  captives  taken  in  just 
warres,  and  such  strangers  as  willingly  selle  themselves  or  are 
sold  to  us.  And  these  shall  have  all  the  liberties  and  Christian 
usages  which  the  law  of  God  established  in  Israeli  concerning 
such  persons  doeth  morally  require.  This  exempts  none  from 
servitude,  who  shall  be  judged  thereto  by  authoritie." 

They  are  familiar  facts — that  when  Thomas  Keyson,  (or, 
Kezar,)  and  James  Smith  imported  a  number  of  slaves  into 
Massachusetts,  in  1645,  the  citizens  of  Boston  denounced  them 
and  all  others  engaged  in  the  same  traffic  as  "  malefactors  and 
murderers ; "  committed  them  to  prison  ; — bore  public  testi- 
mony against  "  the  heinous  crime  of  man-stealing  ;  " — and  or- 
dered the  negroes  to  be  restored  at  the  public  charge  to  their 
native  country, — the  General  Court  at  the  same  time,  by  letter, 
expressing  their  indignation  at  their  wrongs ;  also,  that,  in 
1652,  the  General  Court  of  Rhode  Island  passed  a  well-consid- 
ered law  to  this  effect, — "  That  no  black  mankind  or  white 
being,  shall* be  forced  by  covenant,  bond,  or  otherwise,  to  serve 
any  man,  or  his  assigns  longer  than  ten  years  " — and  that  the 
man  that  will  not  let  them  go  free,  or  shall  sell  them  away  else- 
where, to  the  end  that  they  may  be  enslaved  to  others  a  longer 
time,  he  or  they  shall  forfeit  to  the  Colony  forty  pounds." 
And  equally  familiar  is  the  melancholy  fact,  that  these  honora- 
ble movements  of  the  Fathers  of  New  England,  two  centuries 
ago,  were  thwarted  and  overruled  by  the  covetousness  and  des- 
potic authority  of  the  mother  country.  Their  wise  enactments 
were  set  aside,  and  their  consciences  and  rights  subjected  to  the 
capricious  will  of  an  unjust  foreign  government. 

The  spirit  that  claims  for  the  African,  as  well  as  the  Eu- 
ropean, the  inalienable  right  of  personal  liberty,  however  it 

*  Collections  of  the  American  Statistical  Association,    Vol.  I.  p.  200. 

6* 


58 

may  at  times  have  been  smothered  by  intrigue  or  overpowered 
by  force,  has  never  slumbered  in  New  England.  Enlightened 
and  philanthropic  minds  have  ever  been  awake  and  active. 
Ralph  Sandiford,  in  1729,  and  Benjamin  Lay,  in  1737,  and 
how  many  others  at  earlier  and  later  periods  we  know  not, 
wrote  and  published  facts  on  North  American  slavery  which 
awakened  intense  feeling,  and  prepared  the  public  mind  for  effi- 
cient action,  whenever  the  independence  of  the  colonies  should 
present  the  opportunity.  Still,  it  must  be  confessed,  that  the 
subject  was  then  but  imperfectly  understood  in  its  great  moral 
bearings  ;  and  that  not  a  few,  while  cherishing  the  philan- 
thropic spirit  of  the  gospel,  were  so  far  under  the  influence  of 
temporary  delusion,  that  they  bought  and  sold  their  servants, 
with  scarcely  more  consciousness  of  wrong-doing,  than  when 
they  held  an  apprentice  on  the  strength  of  legal  indentures. 
Devout  men  felt  little  scruple  to  do  what  Abraham  and  David 
and  Philemon  were  believed  to  have  done,  and  what  the  Holy 
Spirit  was  thought  to  have  sanctioned.  Yet  they  commiserated 
the'  slave,  and  spared  no  pains  to  raise  him  to  an  intellectual  and 
spiritual  elevation  like  their  own. 

But  in  1774,  when  the  day  of  our  Independence  began  to 
dawn,  the  Legislatures  of  Rhode  Island  and  Connecticut  pro- 
hibited the  importation  of  slaves  within  their  respective  bounds. 
Massachusetts  abolished  slavery  within  her  limits  in  1780,  and 
embodied  the  act  of  abolition  in  the  Bill  of  Rights  prefixed  to 
her  constitution.  New  Hampshire  and  Vermont  followed  her 
example — the  one  in  1792  and  the  other  in  1793 — both  provid- 
ing constitutionally,  for  immediate  abolition.  Pennsylvania 
passed  laws  in  1780,  for  the  gradual  extinction  of  the  system. 
Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island  did  the  same  in  1784  ;  New 
York  in  1799,  and  1817;  and  New  Jersey  in  1804.  Maine, 
as  an  independent  State,  has  never  been  contaminated  with 
the  evil.  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Michigan,  Wisconsin  and 
Iowa,  through  the  ordinance  of  1787,  have  been  spared  its  with- 
ering curse. 

During  the  past  seventy  years,  the  subject  has  been  freely 
and  ably  discussed  in  the  free  States  by  theologians,  such  as 
Hopkins,  Edwards,  Channing,  Wayland  and  Barnes  ;  by  able 
men  also  of  other  learned  professions  and  by  the  people  gener- 
ally, in  all  its  moral  bearings,  as  well  as  its  influence  on  the 
weal  of  the  country  and  the  destiny  of  the  African.  Neither 
its  social,  political,  economical,  nor  religious  aspects  have  been 
disregarded.  Revelation  and  reason,  history  and  philosophy, 
wit  and  common  sense,  legislation  and  associated  action,  have 
all  been  employed  to  enlighten  the  public  mind,  purify  the  pop- 
ular sentiment,  and  direct  the  combined  energies  of  the  com- 
munity to  the  early  and  complete  annihilation  of  the  mammoth 


59 

evil.  And  that  its  annihilation  has  not  yet  been  effected,  is  less 
to  be  ascribed  to  any  inherent  defect  in  the  conduct  of  these 
discussions,  than  to  strong  prejudices  in  favor  of  a  time-honored 
iniquity,  imbedded  in  the  lusts  of  the  flesh,  the  lusts  of  the 
eye,  and  the  pride  of  life.  Still,  infirmity  is  inseparable  from 
humanity  in  its  present  condition.  From  this  infirmity  flow 
misapprehensions  of  fact,  mistakes  of  judgment,  and  errors  in 
feeling  and  action.  No  man  may  claim  infallibility  for  his 
opinions  or  movements,  till  he  can  claim  exemption  from  the 
unhappy  liabilities  of  our  common  nature.  And  allowing  that 
whatever  has  been  done  to  remove  from  us  the  curse  of  slavery, 
has  been  done  with  the  purest  regard  to  the  good  of  man  and 
the  glory  of  God,  it  by  no  means  follows,  that  all  things  have 
been  done  in  perfect  wisdom.  The  peculiar  circumstances  of 
the  slave-holder  which  would  tend  to  mitigate  undue  severity 
of  judgment  in  his  case  may  not  at  all  times  have  been  suffi- 
ciently considered  ;  and  we  are  quite  sure,  that  the  peculiar 
circumstances  of  the  slave,  demanding  the  interposition  of 
Christian  benevolence  in  his  behalf,  have  been  too  coldly  re- 
garded. Such  as  God  has  made  man,  physically,  intellectually 
and  morally,  so  does  God  deal  with  him,  and  so  should  he  be 
dealt  with  by  his  fellow-men.  He  has  not  made  him  a  ma- 
chine, to  be  driven  by  the  force  of  wind  or  steam,  nor  a  brute 
to  be  urged  on  by  the  goad  or  the  spear,  nor  a  slave  to  go  and 
come  at  a  master's  bidding,  nor  like  Issachar  to  crouch  down  be- 
tween two  burdens  ;  but  he  has  made  him  in  his  own  image, 
and  thereby  rendered  any  assault  on  his  personal  rights  a  crime. 
To  secure  him  against  this,  it  should  be  enough  to  know  that 
he  is  a  MAN — the  embodiment  of  whatever  of  intellectual  or 
moral  worth,  God  has  seen  fit  to  pour  into  the  bosom  of  our 
world.  Let  the  slave-holder  as  well  as  the  slave  be  treated  as 
a  man.  Let  his  misconceptions  of  the  Law  of  God,  his  false 
views  of  the  divine  structure  of  human  society,  and  of  the 
rights  of  those  whom  he  holds  in  servitude,  be  met  in  the  spirit 
of  kindness  and  brotherly  love,  and  removed,  if  possible,  by 
flooding  his  mind  with  new  light.  Let  his  intelligence  be 
honored  by  the  appliance  of  sound  reasoning;  let  his  sensibili- 
ties be  moved  by  direct  address  to  the  noblest  affections  of  his 
nature  ;  and  let  his  moral  sense  be  reached,  through  his  un- 
questioned relations  to  God  and  eternity — >and  if  his  errors  be 
not  at  once  overpowered,  he  may  be  ultimately  woYi  to  faith  in 
correct  principles,  and  to  a  corresponding  discharge  of  his  rela- 
tive duties. 

Our  confidence  of  success,  however,  must  rest  on  God  alone. 
His  arm  must  bring  deliverance  to  the  bond-man  ;  and  for  this, 
his  Spirit  must  illumine  the  mind  arid  touch  the  heart  of  the 
taskmaster.  It  is  our  privilege  and  duty,  however,  to  be  la- 


60 

borers  together  with  Him  ;  nor  is  any  man  so  elevated  or  de- 
pressed in  the  sphere  of  his  action,  so  widely  known  or  obscure 
among  his  fellow-men,  so  abounding  in  wealth  or  sunk  in  pov- 
erty, that  he  may  not  walk  hand  in  hand  with  the  Universal 
Ruler,  in  this  pathway  of  high  and  holy  achievement ;  for  no 
man  living  is  destitute  of  influence  in  the  sphere  where  Heaven 
has  placed  him.  The  little  israelitish  maid  in  the  court  of 
Syria  is  not  a  less  important  agent  in  the  accomplishment  of 
heaven's  high  purposes,  than  the  Egyptian  Pharaoh  or  the 
Chaldean  monarch  ;  and  it  depends  not  on  learning,  wealth  or 
fame  to  determine  the  nature  or  extent  of  the  influence  ema- 
nating from  any  single  mind,  and  exerting  control  over  other 
minds. 

To  the  formation  of  a  correct  public  sentiment,  all  labor  and 
influence  must  be  primarily  directed.  In  a  country  like  ours, 
where  distinctions  of  rank,  hereditary  honors  and  exclusive 
privileges  are  all  but  unknown — where  all  opinions  are  freely 
canvassed,  and  adopted  or  rejected  at'  pleasure,  and  where  the 
day  laborer  uses  the  ballot  box  as  effectively  as  the  most  emi- 
nent statesman,  it  is  not  possible  to  achieve  so  high  a  moral 
end,  except  through  the  enlightenment  of  the  public  mind,  and 
the  more  thorough  purification  of  the  great  heart  of  the  Repub- 
lic. Nor  is  this  enlightenment  and  purification  to  be  effected, 
but  by  the  increased  diffusion  of  the  spirit  of  the  gospel.  In 
that  spirit  lies  the  germ,  not  only  of  all  that  is  holy  before  God, 
but  of  all  that  is  noble  and  beneficent  in  the  actings  of  man's 
moral  and  spiritual  nature.  Let  it  possess  all  hearts,  and  be- 
come the  universal  regulator  of  human  conduct,  and  the  world 
is  disenthralled,  and  at  once  mirrors  forth  the  happiness  of 
heaven. 

To  the  diffusion  of  this  spirit,  every  one  is  virtually  pledged, 
who  stands  committed  to  the  great  interests  of  philanthropy. 
Every  human  tongue,  indeed,  is  bound  to  take  up  heaven's 
message  of  love,  and  mingle  its  notes  of  "  good  will  to  men," 
with  those  of  the  angelic  choir  ;  and  whoever  casts  off  the  ob- 
ligation, needs  the  remonstrances  of  fraternal  love,  and  the 
teachings  of  Christian  fidelity,  to  bring  him  back  to  duty  and  to 
God.  But,  whoever  else  may  be  dumb,  when  the  cause  of 
love  to  our  neighbor  needs  exposition  or  enforcement,  it  is  not 
the  MINISTER  OF  CHRIST.  Let  his  affections  ever  be  stirred 
within  him,  and  his  mind  awakened  to  the  claims  of  down- 
trodden humanity,  and  his  lips  opened  to  pour  forth  the  warn- 
ings of  Heaven  upon  the  oppressor,  with  its  commands  and  en- 
treaties to  repentance  and  the  abandonment  of  his  evil  ways. 
It  is  a  subject  that  demands  his  earnest  study,  as  involving  the 
vitalities  of  the  Christian  faith,  and  the  clearest  practical  de- 
monstrations of  the  superiority  of  revealed  religion  ;  it  demands 


61 

of  him  the  full  development  of  its  moral  bearings,  under  all  the 
solemnities  of  his  commission  as  an  ambassador  for  Christ,  and 
with  all   the   eloquence  he  can   draw  from   the  schools  of  pro- 
phets and   apostles.     Whatever  else  is  silent,  the  pulpit  must  I 
speak.     Whoever  beside  may  indulge  in  a  dignified  indifference,  y 
the  minister  of  Christ  must  lift  his  voice  like  a  trumpet. 

Next  to  the  pulpit  comes  the  PKKSS,  with  its  mighty  en- 
ginery, fearlessly  to  encounter  prejudice,  battle  ignorance, 
stimulate  to  intellectual  effort  and  triumph  over  fanaticism, 
with  all  else  that  conflicts  with  truth  and  love.  Directed  by 
the  spirit  of  philanthropy,  it  issues  neither  the  daily  or  weekly 
Paper,  nor  the  elaborate  Quarterly  in  vain,  while  the  Tract,  and 
the  stately  Volume,  each  in  its  appropriate  sphere  contributes 
powerfully  to  the  wished-for  result.  True,  it  has  not  always 
been  faithful  to  this  holy  cause.  True,  it  has  sometimes  fallen 
into  unworthy  hands,  and  has  scattered  firebrands,  arrows  and 
death  over  the  fair  fields  of  freedom.  But  this  is  not  its  own 
fault ;  and  since  God  honors  it  to  convey  the  "  lively  oracles"  to 
the  ends  of  the  earth,  it  becomes  us  to  honor  it  also,  by  making 
it  the  medium  of  communication  with  all  accessible  minds,  that 
if  possible,  misapprehensions  may  be  corrected,  just  principles 
established,  and  the  spirit  of  freedom  infused  into  all  hearts. 

And  then,  ASSOCIATED  ACTION,  in  well  devised  forms,  and 
under  due  restrictions,  must  succeed  isolated  and  individual 
effort.  "  Union  is  strength."  "  Two  are  better  than  one." 
But  the  object  of  the  association  must  be  single,  and  the  eye  of 
its  members  must  also  be  single.  To  emancipate  the  slave 
wherever  found,  from  the  yoke  of  the  oppressor,  and  give  him 
the  civil  equality  which  is  his  inalienable  right,  is  an  object  of 
sufficient  grandeur  t(^  draw  upon  the  energies  of  any  human 
mind  to  the  utmost,  and  needs  no  combination  with  it  of  radi- 
cal revolution  in  church  or  state.  Wisdom  is  doubtless  profit- 
able to  direct,  in  this  case  as  in  all  others.  It  is  only  necessary 
that  action  be  regulated  by  the  spirit  of  love  and  deference  to 
divine  authority.  If  State  or  National  Legislatures  can  be  led  to 
constitutional  and  energetic  movement  by  the  publicly  declared 
sentiments  of  their  constituents,  then  let  petitions  embodying 
those  sentiments  in  respectful  language,  load  their  tables  from 
session  to  session,  and  be  urged  by  faithful  men  with  thunder- 
ing eloquence  upon  the  ears  of  the  listless  and  averse  ;  or,  if  this 
avail  not,  and  men  are  found  in  our  public  councils  ready  to 
sell  the  birth-right  of  the  slave  for  a  mess  of  pottage,  notwith- 
standigg  the  claims  of  God  and  humanity,  let  them  receive  im- 
mediate dismission  from  the  service  of  freemen,  without  regard 
to  their  political  orthodoxy  in  other  respects.  Whoever  will 
sacrifice  the  rights  of  humanity  vested  in  an  individual  of  Afri- 
can descent,  is  clemonstrably  unfit  to  be  trusted  with  the  pre- 


62 

servation  of  those  rights  in  his  constituents.  He  that  wants 
philanthropy  wants  patriotism.  He  that  rescues  not  the.  man 
fallen  among  thieves,  resists  not  the  cry  that  urges  the  cruci- 
I  fixion  of  the  Son  of  God.  The  betrayer  of  the  poorest  man,  in 
g'  whose  veins  runs  a  brother's  blood,  wants  but  the  opportunity 
and  the  temptation  to  betray  the  brother  of  high  degree.  It 
should  therefore  be  the  determination  of  every  patriotic  mind, 
to  bring  his  undivided  influence  to  bear  upon  the  election  of 
discerning  and  high  minded  friends  of  universal  liberty,  to  all 
places  of  honor  and  trust. 

In  all  this,  it  hardly  must  be  said,  that  we  propose  any  thing 
new,  nor  do  we  claim  to  be  wiser  than  all  that  have  gone  be- 
fore us  in  the  labors  of  philanthropy.  Numerous  associations 
have  been  already  formed,  and  numerous  presses  have  been  en- 
listed in  the  cause  ;  the  pulpit  has  sometimes  spoken  forth  in 
tones  of  power,  and  the  popular  lecturer  has  traversed  the  land; 
the  author  in  his  study,  and  the  orator  at  the  forum  have  elabo- 
rated argument  in  every  form,  and  played  skilfully  on  those 
chords  of  the  human  heart  that  discourse  sweet  music  in  the 
ears  of  Heaven ;  resolves  have  occasionally  passed  our  State 
Legislatures,  nobly  sustaining  the  public  sentiment  that  gave 
them  birth,  and  petitions,  flowing  by  thousands  into  the  halls  of 
Congress,  have  excited  able  and  animated  discussion ;  Greek 
has  met  Greek  on  those  high  places  of  the  field,  and  auspicious 
results  have  already  appeared.  But  the  policy  of  the  govern- 
ment is  yet  undecided,  and  much  remains  to  be  done,  through 
every  organ  that  can  reach  the  public  ear  or  affect  the  public 
heart,  to  give  full  utterance  to  the  quickened  sympathies  of 
philanthropic  bosoms,  and  constrain  the  rulers  of  the  nation  to 
do  justly,  love  mercy,  and  walk  humbly^  Words  of  truth  and 
soberness  may  safely  be  spoken  at  all  times,  in  all  places  and 
by  all  persons;  and  such  words  are  clearly  demanded,  by  the 
simple  grandeur  of  the  object  contemplated,  its  preciousness  to 
the  heart  of  God,  its  congeniality  with  all  the  interests  of  man, 
the  certainty  of  its  ultimate  attainment,  and  the  prospect  of  a 
speedy  and  effectual  termination  of  the  miseries  of  the  victims 
of  oppression. 

We  should  be  unjust  to  the  cause  of  freedom,  if  we  did 
not  refer  to  the  plan  of  colonizing  emancipated  slaves,  with 
others  of  the  colored  race,  upon  the  shores  of  Africa.  Very 
many  of  our  most  intelligent  and  philanthropic  citizens  regard 
this  plan,  as  entitled  to  vastly  more  favor  than  it  has  hitherto 
received.  Yet,  as  is  well  known,  it  has  been  strenuously  op- 
posed ;  and  there  are  questions  involved  in  it,  upon  which  there 
is  still  no  inconsiderable  diversity  and  contrariety  of  opinion. 
To  enter  upon  a  discussion  of  these  would  lead  us  aside  from 


63      . 

the  main  object,  which  we   would  hope  to  accomplish  in  this 
Report. 

Connected  also  with  the  plan  of  colonization  is  another  point 
of  our  subject,  upon  which  we  deem  it  appropriate  to  say  a 
word.  We  refer  to  the  alledged  want  of  capacity  in  the  African 
race  for  an  intelligent  use  of  liberty.  And  in  this  view,  to  say 
nothing  of  other  points,  which  are  of  great  interest,  it  would 
seem  to  your  Committee,  that  the  history  and  the  present  state 
of  the  colony  of  Liberia,  is  worthy  of  the  careful  and  candid 
consideration  of  all,  who  have  any  doubts  in  regard  to  the 
natural  capabilities  of  the  African  race,  for  all  the  demands  of  a 
well-ordered  and  happy  social  organization. 

We  must  remark,  however,  that  facts  from  other  sources  of 
evidence  are  so  accumulated  and  so  overpowering,  that  incre- 
dulity in  respect  to  such  capabilities  is  nothing  short  of  arrant 
folly  or  absolute  stolidity.  Illustrious  African  names,  it  is  well 
known,  adorn  the  early  history  of  the  Christian  church,  as  well 
as  the  annals  of  ancient  literature  and  government ;  whilst  at 
this  moment  there  are  in  our  own  land  orators  of  African  de- 
scent, and  fugitives  from  slavery,  too,  whose  eloquence  attracts 
and  impresses  large  and  cultivated  assemblies.  But,  as  if  to 
afford  to  all  nations  a  signal  exemplification  of  the  capacity  of 
that  race,  and  to  put  the  question  forever  at  rest,  divine  Provi- 
dence has  planted  the  colony  and  established  the  government 
of  Liberia.  We  would,  therefore,  call  attention,  for  a  moment, 
to  the  condition  of  the  people  of  that  Republic. 

The  plan  of  forming  a  colony  on  the  coast  of  Africa  origina- 
ted, it  is  believed,  in  the  Heart  of  northern  benevolence,  and 
was  matured  by  the  wisdom  and  prayerfulness  of  Finley,  Cald- 
well,  Mills,  and  a  few  others  of  whom  the  world  was  not 
worthy,  and  who  now  sleep  in  death.  Thirty-two  years  have 
passed  away,  and  several  thousands  of  the  victims  of  oppression, 
denied  their  natural  rights  in  the  country  of  their  birth,  have 
been  transported  to  the  land  of  their  fathers,  and  fhere  allowed 
to  enjoy  them  unmolested.  Three  hundred  miles  of  continuous 
sea-coast  have  been  secured  to  them  for  an  inheritance,  and 
placed  under  a  government  as  just  and  stable  as  our  own.  Li- 
beria has  ceased  to  be  a  colony.  She  has  become  an  independ- 
ent State,  a  Republic,  a  land  of  the  free  ;  and  every  office  in 
her  government,  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  is  filled  by 
men  of  the  African  race  ;  and  so  well  filled,  that  there  is  more 
hope  of  the  permanence  of  the  Republic  of  Liberia,  than  of 
that  of  France.  Liberia  is  at  this  moment  well  supplied  with 
preachers  and  teachers  of  every  grade,  chiefly  of  African  des- 
cent. The  New  England  system  of  common  schools  is  in  full 
operation  ;  as  is  also  that  of  higher  seminaries  ;  and  the  children 
are  found  to  be  as  tractable,  as  ingenious,  and  as  studious,  as 


64 

the  children  of  pure  Anglo-Saxon  parents.  President  Roberts, 
an  African  by  descent,  and  having  enjoyed  only  a  Liberian 
education,  has  stood  with  credit  to  himself  before  the  statesmen 
and  diplomatists  of  England,  France  and  America,  negotiating 
not  only  an  acknowledgment  of  Liberian  nationality,  but  also 
treaties  of  amity  and  commerce.  The  people  of  Liberia  are  an 
independent  and  recognized  nation,  with  a  constitution  as  pure 
in  its  principles  and  liberal  in  its  provisions,  with  laws  as  equi- 
table and  salutary,  and  an  administration  as  incorrupt  and  judi- 
cious, as  are  enjoyed  by  any  people  under  heaven.  Their 
peace  is  as  a  river,  and  their  righteousness  as  the  waves  of  the 
sea.  Habits  of  industry  and  frugality  are  cherished  by  them, 
and  the  useful  productions  of  the  earth  are  cultivated  with  suc- 
cess, so  as  not  only  to  supply  abundantly  the  demands  of  home 
consumption,  but  to  seek  a  market  in  foreign  lands,  and  give  a 
strong  impulse  to  commercial  enterprise.  So  marked  are  the 
indications  of  public  prosperity  and  individual  welfare,  that 
whole  tribes  of  the  ignorant  and  debased  natives,  with  their 
kings,  are  soliciting  a  participation  of  their  immunities,  and 
pledging  their  lands,  persons  and  children — their  all,  indeed — 
to  the  interest  of  the  government  in  return.  The  result  of  this 
experiment,  as  it  appears  to  us,  and  we  think  must  appear  to  all 
/air  minded  men,  demonstrates  the  capacity  of  the  Africans  for 
all  that  constitutes  a  Christian  civilization. 

We  present  these  facts  to  our  Southern  fellow-citizens,  be- 
seeching them  to  settle  it  in  their  own  minds  as  an  indisputable 
truth,  that  the  argument  by  which  they  have  so  long  endeavor- 
ed to  justify  slavery,  from  the  supposed  incapacity  of  the  Afri- 
can race  for  safe  and  useful  self-direction,  in  any  circumstances, 
is  wholly  groundless.  Let  them  be  assured,  that  those  immortal 
beings  whom  they  doom  by  their  iron  laws  to  perpetual  servi- 
tude, ignorance  and  degradation,  are  capable,  in  such  circum- 
stances as  an  enlightened  philanthropy  may  devise,  of  rising  to 
the  attainment  of  an  intellectual  and  moral  character,  of  a 
Christian  faith  and  piety  which  shall  render  them  peers  of  the 
men  of  other  races  now  rejoicing  in  the  blessings  of  freedom, 
knowledge  and  religion.  When  this  truth  is  fully  believed  and 
felt,  we  are  confident  that  philanthropy  and  the  sense  of  justice 
in  the  slave-holding  States  will  array  themselves  efficiently  on 
the  side  of  that  sentiment  now  so  active  in  the  Christian  world, 
which  is  demanding  the  recognition  of  human  rights,  and  of 
that  Almighty  Providence,  which,  in  tones  both  of  terror  and  of 
love,  is  proclaiming  "liberty  to  the  captive." 

The  signs  of  the  times  are  auspicious.  A  sentiment  of  free- 
dom unknown  before  has  recently  arisen,  which  is  upheaving 
the  nations,  demanding  the  redress  of  wrongs,  and  insisting  on 
the  universal  emancipation  of  the  oppressed.  As  when  Chris- 


65 

tianity  was  first  proclaimed  in  the  midst  of  paganism,  the  tem- 
ples and  statues  of  idolatry  crumbled  in  quick  succession  before 
it,  so  now  through  the  enlightening  influences  of  the  same  faith, 
the  clouds  of  oppression  are  beginning  to  retire,  and  in  rapid 
succession  the  chains  are  failing  from  whole  people  in  bondage. 
Within  the  last  quarter  of  a  century  a  new  impulse  has  been 
given  to  freedom.  State  after  state  has  published  its  testimony 
against  the  intolerable  wrong  of  slavery.  And  now,  drawing 
our  conclusions  from  the  public  acts  of  the  civilized  and  Chris- 
tianized world,  we  hazard  nothing  when  we  aver  that  the  voice 
of  Christendom  is  against  it.  He  who  now  undertakes  to  de- 
fend the  institution  of  Slavery,  does  it  in  the  face  of  the  clear- 
est, the  most  sincerely  expressed  convictions  of  almost  every 
Christian  country  on  the  globe.  He  who  shall  defend  it,  de- 
fends that  which  Christendom  with  concurrent  voice  has  united 
to  reprobate,  and  is  hastening  to  destroy. 


It  would  be  easy  to  collect  a  mass  of  enlightened  names,  in 
all  ages  and  countries,  against  the  system,  as  opposed  alike  by 
reason  and  religion.  But  our  appeal  shall  be  made  to  acts  of 
public  bodies,  of  parliaments  and  councils  of  state — arid  from 
these  we  can  make  good  the  assertion,  that  slavery,  like  piracy 
and  robbery,  wherever  it  exists,  exists  in  opposition  to  the  con- 
demning voice  of  the  Christian  world. 

Let  us  take  the  last  quarter  of  a  century,  and  see  how  often 
and  under  what  variety  of  forms  public  condemnation  has  been 
passed  on  the  whole  system  of  slavery,  under  every  name. 

We  begin  with  Austria,  that  large  and  influential  European 
state.  On  the  25th  day  of  June,  1826,  "it  was  declared  by 
an  ordinance  of  his  Imperial  and  Royal  Majesty  the  Emperor, 
that  any  slave  from  the  moment  he  treads  the  soil  of  the  Impe- 
rial and  Royal  Dominions  of  Austria,  or  even  merely  steps  on 
board  an  Austrian  vessel,  shall  be  free."  Brief  and  comprehen- 
sive words  !  Uttered  by  the  constituted  head  and  the  united 
voice  of  more  than  thirty  millions  of  people. 

Pass  on  now  to  the  Spanish  provinces,  that  extend  across  the 
whole  northern  portions  of  South  America,  between  the  Atlan- 
tic and  Pacific  oceans.  They  had  thrown  off  the  yoke  of  the 
mother  country,  and  under  the  names  of  Columbia  and  Bolivia, 
comprising  a  population  of  nearly  five  millions  more,  had  taken 
their  place  among  modern  republics.  In  1828  they  proclaimed 
freedom  to  all  the  slaves.  Certain  revenues  were  set  apart  for 
the  purpose  of  carrying  the  act  of  emancipation  into  execution, 
and  children  born  after  a  certain  period  were  to  be  free. 
7 


66 

Then  followed  the  neighboring  state  of  Mexico  in  the  same 
glorious  career.  Having  in  like  manner  achieved  her  own  in- 
dependence, she  published,  Sept.  15,  1829,  a  decree  for  the  en- 
tire abolition  of  slavery,  containing  these  remarkable  words  : 
"  Being  desirous  to  signalize  the  anniversary  of  independence 
by  an  act  of  national  justice  and  beneficence,  which  may  re- 
dound to  the  advantage  and  support  of  so  inestimable  a  good, 
which  may  tend  to  the  aggrandizement  of  the  Republic,  and 
which  may  reinstate  an  unfortunate  portion  of  its  inhabitants 
in  the  sacred  rights  which  nature  gave  them,  and  the  nation 
should  protect  by  wise  and  wholesome  laws — I  (the  President) 
have  resolved  to  decree  that  Slavery  is  and  shall  remain  abol- 
ished in  this  Republic."  Whatever  may  be  the  fate  of  this 
distracted,  unhappy  Republic,  in  the  darkest  hour  of  her  degra- 
dation, this  act  will  ever  be  a  bright  remembered  page  in  her 
history. 

Then  we  have  to  record  the  Act  of  the  British  Government, 
by  which,  Aug.  1,  1834,  800,000  slaves  were  set  free  in  a  day, 
in  the  British  West  India  Islands.  This  act,  the  most  memora- 
ble in  the  modern  history  of  emancipation,  was  carried  into 
effect  without  bloodshed,  without  tumult,  or  the  outbreak  of 
violent  passion,  but  with  the  solemn  enthusiasm  becoming  the 
great'occasion,  in  the  places  of  religious  worship,  amid  prayers 
and  hymns  of  praise.  The  experiment  is  now  in  a  course  of 
successful  operation.  If  there  have  been  temporary  drawbacks, 
arising  from  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  it  is  now  proved  be- 
yond a  doubt,  not  only  that  it  may  be  made  without  hazard, 
but  that  the  great  gift  of  liberty  cannot  be  bestowed  upon  any 
without  physical  and  moral  advantage  to  all. 

We  hasten  to  another  testimony,  to  show  the  settled  con- 
viction which  prevails  respecting  the  wrong  and  inhumanity  of 
slavery.  We  refer  to  the  decrees  of  the  late  head  of  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  church.  December  13,  1839,  Gregory  XVI.  pub- 
lished once  more  the  earnest  remonstrances  of  the  Catholic 
church  against  every  species  of  involuntary  servitude.  He 
says, — "  We  admonish  by  our  apostolical  authority  and  urgently 
invoke  in  the  name  of  God  all  Christians  of  whatever  condi- 
tion, that  none,  henceforth,  dare  subject  to  slavery,  unjustly 
persecute,  or  despoil  of  their  goods,  Indians,  Negroes,  or  any 
other  classes  of  men." — A  protest  urged  again  by  the  present 
Pontiff  in  language  as  emphatic  and  authoritative. 

There  is  a  contagion  in  the  spread  of  liberty.  The  spirit 
which  succors  the  down-trodden,  and  remembers  the  forgotten, 
is  wafted  like  winged  seed  into  most  congenial  spots,  and  takes 
root  in  unlooked-for  places.  Hence,  as  we  pass  from  the  cen- 
tre of  civilization  and  religion  to  a  semi-barbarous  region,  there 
is  another  testimony  to  the  worth  of  individual  freedom.  The 


67 

Bey  of  Tunis,  at  the  head  of  two  millions  of  subjects,  January 
22,  1846,  declared  his  sovereign  pleasure  in  the  following  terms : 
"  The  servitude  imposed  on  a  part  of  the  human  kind  whom 
God  has  created,  is  a  very  cruel  thing,  and  our  heart  shrinks 
from  it.  Now,  therefore,  we  have  thought  proper  to  publish 
that  we  have  abolished  men's  slavery  throughout  our  dominions, 
inasmuch  as  we  regard  all  slaves  who  are  on  our  territory  as 
free,  and  do  not  recognize  the  legality  of  their  being  kept  as 
property."  We  have  here  a  sentiment  worthy  of  a  most  en- 
lightened Christian  ruler ! 

Soon  afterwards,  in  a  little  kingdom  hard  by  the  frozen  zone, 
the  heart  of  royalty  is  melted,  and  a  decree  is  issued  by  the 
king  of  Denmark,  in  which  it  is  proclaimed,  July  3, 1848,  "  that 
all  unfree  in  Danish  West  India  Islands  are  from  to-day  eman- 
cipated." It  is  added  in  the  St.  Thomas  Times,  two  days 
afterwards:  "The  lively  joy  with  which  the  boon  was  received 
by  the  unfree  in  the  Island  can  be  easily  imagined;  but  we  are 
happy  to  state  that  although  the  decree  was  so  sudden,  so  un- 
expected, no  other  sounds  were  heard  but  those  of  rejoicing  and 
thankfulness." 

Early  in  the  same  year,  the  Provisional  Government 
of  France  decreed  the  emancipation  of  slavery  in  all  her  colo- 
nies. When  the  great  capital  had  driven  the  king  from  his 
throne,  and  the  nation  was  emancipated,  the  first  act  was  to 
strike  off  the  chains  from  the  limbs  of  the  slave,  within  the 
farthest  bounds  of  the  Republic.  In  some  of  the  provinces,  the 
decrees  of  the  government  were  carried  into  partial  effect  only ; 
in  others,  the  acts  of  emancipation  were  consummated.  The 
last,  of  which  any  account  has  been  given,  took  place  on  the 
10th  of  August,  1848,  in  Cayenne  and  French  Guiana.  And 
it  contains  a  testimony,  not  only  to  the  extent  to  which  the 
spirit  of  liberty  is  now  spread,  but  to  the  safety  of  immediate, 
unconditional  emancipation.  Here  also  the  most  serious  appre- 
hensions existed,  lest  when  the  proclamation  of  freedom  should 
be  made,  there  should  be  tumult  and  bloodshed.  The  inhabi- 
tants for  many  days  previous  went  armed;  but  on  that  day, 
says  an  eye-witness,  "  little  by  little,  confidence  was  re-estab- 
lished ;  and  the  thronging  of  the  inhabitants  through  the  streets 
commenced  ;  the  Te  Deum  was  sung  at  the  church,  after 
which  more  than  a  thousand  negroes  marched  to  the  front  of 
the  Governor's  house  to  thank  him  for  the  proclamation  made 
by  him  giving  them  their  freedom  ;  and  it  was  truly  admirable 
to  us  who  so  little  expected  it,  to  see  these  poor  people,  who 
immediately  after  repaired  to  the  church,  and  then  quietly 
kneeling  down  and  lifting  up  their  hands  to  heaven  thanked 
God  for  giving  them  their  liberty." 

Thus   have    we   testimony   from  almost   every   portion   of 


68 

Christendom  ;  and  we  think  that  we  are  fully  sustained  in  the 
position,  that  the  enlightened  sentiment  of  the  day  is  diamet- 
rically opposed  to  the  extension  and  continuance  of  slavery  ; 
and  that  he  who  upholds  and  defends  the  system,  does  it  in 
opposition  to  the  distinctly  avowed  and  settled  convictions 
of  the  Christian  world. 


But  we  are  well  aware,  that,  in  the  judgment  of  many,  there 
is  in  the  fundamental  laws  of  our  government,  a  very  formida- 
ble, if  not  insurmountable  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  abolition 
of  American  slavery.  Your  Committee  have,  therefore,  devoted 
some  attention  to  this  part  of  the  subject  before  them,  and 
would  be  glad,  if  the  limits  of  their  Report  would  allow  a  more 
detailed  historical  view  of  it. 

The  Government  of  Great  Britain  established  slavery  in  this 
country  ;  and  up  to  the  period  of  our  Revolution,  the  authority 
of  that  government  was  its  only  legal  sanction  among  us.  The 
Declaration  of  Independence  subverted  the  authority  of  that 
government  in  all  the  colonies  consenting  to  or  adopting  it ;  but 
did  not  subvert  and  annul  all  the  laws  which  had  been  estab- 
lished in  the  colonies  under  that  authority.  It  did,  however, 
affirm  and  indicate  principles,  both  in  regard  to  man  and  his 
rights,  and  to  government,  its  duty  and  obligations,  utterly  in- 
consistent with  slavery  and  the  maintenance  and  execution  of 
all  the  laws  in  relation  to  it.  This  inconsistency  was  felt  and 
acknowledged  by  many  ;  and  during  the  Revolutionary  strug- 
gle the  Declaration  and  its  principles  had  a  manifest  influence 
upon  the  public  mind,  and  in  some  cases  upon  legal  action  in 
regard  to  slavery. 

Dr.  Belknap,  in  his  account  of  the  decrease  of  slavery  in 
Massachusetts,*  says  :  "  At  the  beginning  of  our  controversy 
with  Great  Britain,  several  persons,  who  before  had  entertained 
sentiments  opposed  to  the  slavery  of  the  blacks,  did  then  take 
occasion  publicly  to  remonstrate  against  the  inconsistency  of 
contending  for  our  own  liberty,  and  at  the  same  time  depriving 
other  people  of  theirs."  It  was  under  the  effect  produced  by 
the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  the  influence  of  the  pub- 
lic opinion  of  which  it  was  in  part  both  the  source  and  the  ex- 
pression, that  juries  in  Massachusetts  in  several  cases  rendered 
verdicts  in  favor  of  slaves,  previous  to  the  adoption  of  the  con- 
stitution of  1780,  which  constitution  by  the  decision  of  the 

*  Mass.  Hist.  Coll.  vol.  IV.  p.  201. 


69 

supreme  court  in  1783,  was  interpreted  as  establishing  upon 
broad  and  general  principles  the  liberties  of  the  negroes. 

There  are  misapprehensions  and  misrepresentations  of  the 
constitution,  on  the  subject  of  slavery,  which  seem  to  have 
originated  in  sheer  ignorance  of  the  history  of  our  Federal  Gov- 
ernment. Many  intelligent  men  are  probably  unacquainted 
with  the  real  origin  and  import  of  the  enumeration  of  '•'  three- 
fifths  of  all  other  persons,"  beside  "  free  persons,  including 
those  bound  to  service  for  a  term  of  years,  and  excluding  In- 
dians not  taxed." 

In  the  report  of  the  committee  of  the  Continental  Congress, 
appointed  to  draft  articles  of  confederation,  it  was  proposed, 
"  that  all  charges  of  war,  and  all  other  expenses  that  shall  be 
incurred  for  the  common  defence  or  the  general  welfare,  shall 
be  defrayed  out  of  a  common  treasury,  which  shall  be  supplied 
by  the  several  colonies,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  inhabi- 
tants of  every  age,  sex  and  quality,  except  Indians  not  paying 
taxes  in  each  colony."  The  report  was  submitted  July  12, 
1776.  Some  days  afterwards,  while  under  discussion  in  com- 
mittee of  the  whole  house,  Mr.  Chase,  of  Maryland,  endeavor- 
ed to  obviate  some  objections,  by  an  amendment,  "  that  the 
quotas  should  be  paid,  not  by  the  number  of  the  inhabitants  of 
every  condition,  but  by  that  of  '  the  white  inhabitants.'  "  The 
amendment  suggested  and  advocated  by  Mr.  Chase,  was  strenu- 
ously resisted  by  John  Adams  and  others  ;  mainly  because,  as 
was  contended,  inhabitants  were  to  be  taken  as  an  index  of 
property,  and,  therefore,  if  taxes  should  be  apportioned  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  white  inhabitants,  the  smallest  share  of 
the  burden  would  fall  upon  those  States  in  which  were  the 
greatest  number  of  slaves.  And  it  was  well  understood,  that 
the  Southern  States  were  much  richer  than  the  Northern. 

The  comparative  value  of  free  and  slave  labor  very  mate- 
rially affected  the  views  of  the  different  speakers, — as  may  be 
seen  by  an  examination  of  the  "Madison  Papers."  As  a  com- 
promise, Mr.  Harrison,  of  Virginia,  proposed  that  two  slaves 
should  be  counted  as  one  free  man ; — it  being  doubtful  in  his 
opinion,  if  two  slaves  did  any  more  work,  and  thus,  as  produ- 
cers of  wealth,  could  justly  be  reckoned  as  any  more  than  equal 
to  one  free  man. 

Both  the  amendment  and  the  proposition  of  the  committee 
were  rejected.  It  was  agreed  to  apportion  the  taxes,  according 
to  the  valuation  of  houses  and  lands.  But  such  valuation 
having  afterwards  been  found  impracticable,  the  -taxes  were 
assessed  according  to  the  estimated  population  of  the  different 
States  respectively. 

It  is  of  much  importance  here  to  notice,  that,  in  the  debate 
upon  the  articles  of  confederation,  the  subject  of  slavery  was 


70 

introduced,  not  upon  any  question  of  natural  or  moral  right,  but 
upon  a  question  of  finance,  or  of  political  economy.  Our 
Southern  brethren,  and  ourselves  also,  now  look  at  the  subject 
from  a  very  different  position  from  that  in  which  it  was  viewed 
by  the  members  of  the  Continental  Congress  in  1776,  or  by 
the  framers  of  the  constitution,  in  1787. 

In  1783,  the  Continental  Congress  made  an  attempt  to  revive 
the  national  credit.  A  committee  reported,  "that  the  quotas  of 
the  several  States  should  be  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  in- 
habitants of  every  age,  sex  and  condition,  provided  that  in  such 
enumeration  no  persons  shall  be  included  who  are  bound  to  ser- 
vitude for  life,  according  to  the  laws  of  the  State  to  which  they 

belong,  other  than  such  as  may  be  between  the  ages  of 

years."  Insuperable  objections  were  urged  against  any  appor- 
tionment, which  contemplated  the  age  of  persons.  The  pro- 
portion of  absolute  numbers  was  finally  agreed  to, — slaves 
being  rated  as  five  to  three.  One  member  proposed  the  ratio 
of  four  to  three  ;  another  of  four  to  one.  Some  were  in  favor 
of  two  to  one,  or  of  three  to  one.  The  ratio  of  five  to  three 
was,  in  Mr.  Madison's  view,  as  it  would  seem,  a  proof  of  liber- 
ality and  magnanimity  on  the  part  of  those  immediately  inter- 
ested in  the  avails  of  slave-labor. 

In  the  legislation  of  1776  and  1783,  we  doubtless  have  the 
natural  history  and  the  true  import  of  the  provision  of  the 
second  section  of  the  first  article  of  the  constitution,  which 
determines  the  apportionment  of  representatives  and  direct 
taxes.  The  provision  was  adopted,  because  members  of  the 
Convention,  who  were  "  principled  against  slavery,"  yet  were 
unwilling  to  seem  to  do  injustice  to  the  slave-holding  States, 
by  an  apportionment  of  direct  taxes,  without  an  equivalent 
representation.  Throughout  the  discussions  of  the  Convention 
in  1787,  as  well  as  those  of  the  Continental  Congress,  the 
Northern  and  Southern  States  appear  in  no  such  attitude,  upon 
the  subject  of  slavery,  as  would  now  be  presented,  in  the  exist- 
ing, state  of  moral  and  political  opinions.  The  most  decided 
convictions  against  the  right  and  the  policy  of  slave-holding 
were  freely  expressed  by  members  of  the  Convention,  from  the 
south  as  well  as  the  north  of  the  Potomac.  And  a  speech  of 
Gouverneur  Morris,  of  Pennsylvania,  would  satisfy  the  most 
uncompromising  and  unsparing  antagonist  of  the  slave-holding 
system,  among  all  who  now  desire  its  speedy  and  total  extirpa- 
tion. "He  never  would  concur  in  upholding  domestic  slavery. 
It  was  a  nefarious  institution.  It  was  the  curse  of  Heaven  on 
.the  States  where  it  prevailed."  * 

The  compromise,  therefore,  by  which  the  enumeration  of  the 

*  Madison  Papers,  pp.  1263-5. 


71 

"  three-fifths  "  prevailed,  was  not  such  as  is  now  generally 
maintained  by  the  representatives  of  the  slave-holding  States. 
It  was  primarily,  if  not  strictly,  financial.  It  may  be  true  that 
some  of  those  States  would  not  have  been  willing  to  come  into 
the  Union,  unless  some  such  indulgence  towards  the  "peculiar 
institution  "  had  been  granted.  But  the  actual  feeling  of  other 
members,  who,  in  the  circumstances,  gave  consent,  was  no 
doubt  the  same  or  similar  to  that  of  Mr.  Williamson,  of  North 
Carolina,  who,  in  the  warm  debate  on  the  slave-trade,  for 
the  continuance  of  which  South  Carolina  and  Georgia  were  so 
importunate,  said,  "  that  both  in  opinion  and  practice  he  was 
against  slavery,  but  thought  it  more  in  favor  of  humanity,  from 
a  view  of  all  circumstances,  to  let  in  South  Carolina  and 
Georgia  on  those  terms,  [viz.,  that  the  slave-trade  should  riot 
be  prohibited  previous  to  1808,]  than  to  exclude  them  from  the 
Union."  *  And  Mr.  Madison,  in  opposing  the  continuance  of 
the  slave-trade  beyond  the  year  1800,  said,  "  twenty  years  will 
produce  all  the  mischief  that  can  be  apprehended  from  the 
liberty  to  import  slaves.  So  long  a  term  will  be  more  dishon- 
orable to  the  "American  character,  than  to  say  nothing  about  it 
in  the  constitution."  f  We  are  mortified  to  say,  that,  if  every 
member  of  the  Eastern  States  had  then  joined  with  Mr.  Madi- 
son, and  his  noble  associates,  the  slave-trade  would  not  have 
continued,  as  it  did,  until  1808.  Principle  yielded  to  "  the 
mammon  of  unrighteousness." 

But  upon  the  naked  question,  whether  men  were  to  be  ac- 
knowledged as  property,  although  taxed  as  such  in  the  condi- 
tion of  slaves,  it  would  not  have  been  possible  to  have  obtained 
a  major  vote  in  the  Convention  of  1787.  And  it  is  an  utterly 
false  averment,  as  we  contend,  that  the  constitution  was  un- 
derstood by  the  framers  of  it,  to  be  a  recognition  of  slavery,  as 
a  system  or  institution.  If  the  Southern  States,  instead  of  being 
the  richest,  had  been  the  poorest,  we  are  fully  warranted  to 
say,  that  the  world  would  never  have  heard  of  the  enumeration 
of  "  three-fifths  ;  "  and  no  such  indelible  stain  would  have  ever 
marred  the  national  glory  of  the  charter  of  our  Federal  Union. 

And  now,  as  in  the  result  the  Government  of  the  Union  has 
been  sustained  without  such  taxation  as  was  acknowledged  to 
be  the  ground  of  the  rule  of  representation,  with  what  pro- 
priety do  statesmen  and  others  of  the  South  so  determinedly 
maintain  the  well-known  doctrine  of  Southern  rights  ?  But 
we  cannot  pursue  this  and  some  other  inquiries,  which,  how- 
ever, are  of  great  practical  interest,  in  the  present  relations  of 
the  free  and  the  slave-holding  States. 

That  by  the  majority  of  the  Convention  which  framed  the 

*  Madison  Papers,  p.  1428.     t  Do.  p.  1427. 


72 

constitution  of  the  United  States,  slavery  was  deemed  a  tem- 
porary institution,  is  evident  from  the  tone  of  much  of  the 
discussion  had  at  the  time,  both  within  and  without  that  body  ; 
and  might  be  inferred  from  the  single  circumstance,  that  the 
express  mention  of  it,  by  name,  is  so  carefully  avoided  in  that 
instrument,  that  the  words  which  refer  to  it  would  be  unintel- 
ligible, if  the  fact  or  the  existence  of  slavery  did  not  interpret 
them. 

The  animus  of  the  framers  of  the  constitution  might  also  be 
inferred  from  the  fact,  that  its  adoption  was  immediately  follow- 
ed by  the  establishment  of  societies  for  the  abolition  of  slavery 
in  Virginia,  Maryland,  and  North  Carolina,  in  which  societies 
many  of  those  very  statesmen,  who  had  been  members  of  the 
Convention,  including  Washington  and  Jefferson,  were  actively 
engaged.  Up  to  the  date  of  the  constitution,  the  black  popu- 
lation had  failed  to  reproduce  its  own  number,  under  the  law  of 
natural  increase.  It  was  supposed,  therefore,  as  has  been  al- 
ready suggested  in  this  Report,  that  on  the  cessation  of  the 
slave-trade,  the  gradual  extinction  of  the  colored  race  within 
our  borders  would  begin,  and  slavery  would  cease.  This 
would  have  been  the  result,  perhaps,  had  not  the  purchase  of 
Louisiana  and  the  extension  of  slave-territory  opened  a  home 
market  and  acted  as  a  bounty  or  premium  on  production. 

As  such  were  the  views  and  expectations  of  the  framers  of 
the  constitution,  it  is  not  surprising  that  all  which  that  instru- 
ment can  be  interpreted  or  made  to  contain,  is  the  reluctant  and 
half-latent  acknowledgment  of  the  existence  of  slavery,  with 
provision  for  the  civil  estimate  in  respect  to  representation,  and 
the  treatment  in  respect  to  fugitives,  of  those  who  then  hap- 
pened to  be  included  under  it,  without  indicating  any  purpose 
or  possibility  of  its  extension,  but  implying  the  contrary ;  and 
without  making  any  provision,  or  conferring  any  power,  by 
which  it  could  be  lawfully  extended,  or  by  which  the  rights 
(now  so  called)  which  it  confers,  could  be  legitimated  in  any 
State  where  it  did  not  then  exist,  or  upon  any  territory  that 
might  thereafter  be  added  to  the  Union.  This,  as  we  believe, 
it  can  be  demonstrated,  is  the  extent  of  the  connection  between 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  and  Slavery.  And  in 
what  we  have  now  to  say,  in  commenting  more  particularly 
upon  the  language  of  the  constitution,  we  must  omit  many 
historical  and  other  citations,  which  a  full  view  of  this  part  of 
the  subject  would  very  urgently  require  us  to  introduce. 

That  slavery  described  by  the  periphrasis  of  "persons  held 
to  service,"  is  recognized  by  the  constitution,  as  existing  in 
some  of  the  States  of  the  Union,  will  of  course  not  be  denied ; 
and  it  must  be  admitted  also,  that  so  far  as  it  is  recognized  by 
that  instrument,  and  until  it  shall  in  some  legal  manner  be  abol- 


73 

ished,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  judiciary  to  sustain  the  provisions 
of  the  constitution  in  respect  to  it.  In  interpreting  these  pro- 
visions, we  should  always  bear  in  mind  the  circumstances  un- 
der which  they  were  adopted.  Most  important  also  it  is,  that 
we  bear  in  mind  the  principle,  that  slavery,  from  its  very  nature 
and  character,  is  a  wrong  in  itself,  having  no  foundation  in 
natural  or  moral  right  ;  and  whoever  avers  that  it  has  a  legal 
existence  within  any  particular  territory  or  jurisdiction,  must 
prove  that  it  exists  by  clear  and  distinct  provision  of  law. 
This  principle  is  recognized  by  eminent  English  jurists,  who, 
when  they  have  had  occasion  to  speak  of  slavery,  uniformly 
say, — "  It  is  of  such  a  nature,  that  it  is  incapable  of  being  intro- 
duced on  any  reasons,  moral  or  political,  but  only  provisions  of 
law  ;  and  it  is  so  odious,  that  nothing  can  be  suffered  to  support 
it,  but  positive  law." 

American  jurists  have  recognized  the  same  principle.  In 
pronouncing  a  judgment  of  the  supreme  court,  chief  justice 
Marshall,  speaking  of  the  slave  trade,  uses  this  language — 
"  That  it  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  nature  will  scarcely  be  denied. 
That  every  man  has  a  natural  right  to  the  fruits  of  his  own 
labor  is  generally  admitted,  and  that  no  other  person  can  right- 
fully deprive  him  of  those  fruits  and  appropriate  them  against 
his  will,  seems  to  be  the  necessary  result  of  the  admission." 
These  views  and  principles  have  received  the  sanction  of  the 
supreme  court  of  Massachusetts,  and  will  be  sustained  by 
every  intelligent  legal  tribunal  j  and  on  this  ground  it  may  be 
maintained,  that  no  intendment  in  favor  of  slavery  can  be  made 
out  from  the  constitution,  except  such  as  is  the  necessary  result 
of  express  provision.  In  reference  to  right,  justice,  and  equity, 
the  construction  applied  to  any  instrument  or  law,  is  liberal  and 
favorable,  so  as  thereby,  if  practicable,  to  uphold  the  right. 
When  any  instrument  or  law  is  designed  to  uphold  or  accom- 
plish a  purpose  not  in  conformity  with  natural  right,  the  con- 
struction adopted  is  strict  and  rigid,  so  as  thereby  to  limit  and 
restrain  the  evil  which  might  otherwise  exist.  Applying  this 
just  principle  of  construction  to  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States,  in  its  relations  to  slavery,  we  say  that  it  was  no  part  of 
the  intention  of  that  instrument  to  create  or  establish  the  insti- 
tution of  slavery,  or  to  enlarge  its  territory,  or  to  give  to  Con- 
gress any  power  or  right  to  establish  it,  or  to  recognize  or  per- 
mit its  existence  in  any  State  or  Territory  of  the  Union,  where 
it  did  not  exist  at  the  time  the  constitution  was  framed  and 
adopted.  At  that  time  the  institution  had  a  legal  existence 
within  certain  States ;  this  limited  existence,  as  a  matter  of 
compromise,  was  permitted  to  continue.  Without  and  beyond 
these  States,  slavery  has  and  can  have  no  legal  existence  under 
the  constitution.  The  provisions  of  that  instrument  and  its 


74 

whole  spirit  and  principles  are  prohibitory  as  regards  slavery 
over  all  other  soil  that  has  since,  is  now,  or  may  become,  a  por- 
tion of  the  Union.  For  that  instrument,  as  is  asserted  in  its 
first  clause,  was  formed,  among  other  things,  to  establish  justice 
and  secure  the  blessings  of  liberty  to  its  framers  and  their  pos- 
terity. Slavery  most  certainly  is  not  essential  to  justice  or  the 
blessings  of  liberty.  It  is  in  direct  conflict  and  opposition  to  these 
purposes.  This  being  the  spirit  and  purpose  of  the  constitution, 
no  intendment  in  support  of  slavery  can  be  drawn  from  it,  but 
such  as  is  upheld  by  the  most  strict  and  rigid  interpretation  of 
the  express  provisions  by  which  it  is  to  a  certain  extent  recog- 
nized. These  provisions  are  but  two  in  number.  The  first, 
and  in  some  respects  the  most  important  one,  is  in  these  words, 
"  The  migration  or  importation  of  such  persons  as  any  of  the 
States  now  existing  shall  think  proper  to  admit,  shall  not  be 
prohibited  by  Congress  prior  to  the  year  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  eight."  This  provision  is  an  express  limitation  of 
the  right  to  import  and  consequently  to  hold  slaves,  in  language 
which  admits  of  only  one  construction.  This  right  was  there- 
by restrained  to  the  States  then  existing,  and  of  these  States  it 
was  to  be  exercised  only  by  those  in  which  at  that  time,  slave- 
ry had  a  legal  existence.  No  broader  construction  can  be  put 
upon  this  provision.  The  second  provision  is  thus  expressed. 
"No  person  held  to  service  or  labor  in  one  State,  under  the 
laws  thereof,  escaping  into  another,  shall  be  discharged  of  such 
service,  but  shall  be  delivered  up  to  the  party  to  whom  such 
service  is  due." 

This  second  provision  was  not  designed  to  extend  or  enlarge 
the  first — tout  only  to  uphold  it  in  the  limited  manner,  in  which 
it  was  intended  to  be  interpreted,  and  goes  to  prove  that  that 
limited  interpretation  is  correct.  By  the  universal  principles  of 
law,  as  known  to  communities  in  which  slavery  has  no  exist- 
ence— whenever  a  slave  puts  his  foot  upon  the  territory  of  such 
community,  he  becomes  free.  The  second  provision  was 
adopted  to  obviate  the  effect  of  this  principle  ;  because  without 
it  a  slave  escaping  from  a  slave-holding  State  into  a  non-slave- 
holding  one,  would  be  regarded  as  free,  notwithstanding  the 
right  secured  to  his  owner  under  the  first  provision  ;  and  the 
fact  that  it  was  deemed  necessary  to  insert  this  second  provi- 
sion, shows  that  the  first  was  understood  and  was  to  be  inter- 
preted in  the  limited  manner  already  noticed. 

An  opinion  different  from  the  position  stated  above,  is  held 
by  some,  who,  however  they  may  express  themselves,  rely  for 
support  to  their  opinion  upon  that  provision  of  the  constitution, 
which  says  that,  "citizens  of  each  State  shall  be  entitled  to  all 
the  privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens  of  the  several  States." 
But  this  provision  was  clearly  not  intended  to  enlarge  the  right 


75 

of  slavery,  as  recognized  to  a  limited  extent  in  the  two  provi" 
sions  upon  that  subject  already  referred  to.  To  infer  from  it  a 
right  in  a  citizen  of  a  slave-holding  State  to  become  a  citizen 
of  a  non-slave-holding  State,  carrying  his  slaves  with  him  and 
exercising  over  them  therein  the  rights  and  power  which  he 
had  been  accustomed  to  exercise  in  the  State  from  which  he 
removed,  is  a  supposition  so  monstrously  absurd,  that  it  could 
never  be  for  a  moment  entertained,  save  by  one  in  whom  the 
strong  influence  of  passion  and  self-interest  had  blinded  the 
judgment.  Let  the  principle  involved  in  this  inference  be  car- 
ried out  and  applied  to  all  other  matters  as  well  as  to  slavery, 
and  every  law  of  every  State  may  be  in  turn  modified  or  sub- 
verted by  it,  and  inextricable  confusion  introduced  into  the  ad- 
ministration of  justice — or  what  would  then  be  the  administra- 
tion of  injustice. 

The  law  of  Massachusetts  punishes  murder  with  death. 
The  law  of  Michigan  spares  life,  but  condemns  to  perpetual 
imprisonment  for  the  same  crime.  To  infer  that  because  the 
constitution  says,  "citizens  of  each  State  shall  be  entitled  to 
all  the  privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens  in  the  several 
States,"  therefore  a  citizen  of  Michigan  can  come  to  Massachu- 
setts, either  on  a  visit  or  for  permanent  residence,  and  commit- 
ting murder,  may  claim  to  be  exempt  from  the  death  penalty, 
and  subject  only  to  imprisonment  for  life,"on  the  ground  that 
this  was  his  privilege  and  immunity  under  the  laws  in  the 
State  of  Michigan,  would  not  be  more  absurd  than  to  infer  from 
the  same  provision  of  the  constitution  that  a  citizen  of  Carolina 
may  come  to  reside  in  Massachusetts  and  claim  to  exercise  and 
enjoy  in  the  latter  the  privileges  and  immunities  which  were 
guarantied  to  him  as  a  citizen  slave-holder  in  the  former  State. 
Both  inferences,  and  all  such  inferences,  are  unwarrantable 
and  absurd. 

The  clause  of  the  constitution  under  consideration,  was 
simply  intended  to  prevent  the  several  States  from  prohibiting 
the  free  ingress  and  egress  of  citizens  of  one  State  into  and 
from  another.  Under  it  any  citizen  of  the  United  States  has  a 
right  to  pass  from  Maine  to  Texas,  and  from  Massachusetts  to 
Oregon  or  California,  unmolested  and  unquestioned,  and  to  fix 
his  residence  in  any  State  that  he  chooses ;  but  in  passing  from 
one  to  another  State,  he  does  not  carry  with  him  the  laws  of 
the  State  from  which  he  passes,  but  becomes  subject  immedi- 
ately to  the  law  of  the  State  within  which  he  may  chance  to 
be. 

Those  who  uphold  slavery,  have  never  urged  or  pretended 
that  a  citizen  of  a  State  in  which  slavery  existed  at  the  time  of 
the  adoption  of  the  constitution,  could  carry  and  hold  his  slaves 
as  such,  into  a  State  in  which  at  that  time  slavery  had  no  legal 


76 

existence.  They  have  admitted,  tacitly  at  least,  that,  in  this 
respect,  slavery  so  far  as  recognized  was  territorially  restricted 
by  the  constitution,  and  that  thus  far  the  strict  construction  of 
that  instrument  in  the  matter  of  slavery  was  correct. 

They  have  contended,  however,  that  new  territory,  acquired 
by  conquest,  by  treaty  or  purchase,  belongs  to  the  several 
States  in  their  collective  capacity — and  therefore  a  slave-holder 
has  a  right  to  occupy  such  new  territory  with  his  slaves. 

Admit  the  premises  of  the  argument,  yet  the  conclusion  does 
not  follow.  The  slave-holder  going  to  new  territory,  must 
take  the  law  of  the  territory  as  he  finds  it.  He  does  not  and 
cannot  carry  there  the  law  of  the  State  from  which  he  goes. 
But  it  is  answered,  that  Congress  may  make  rules  and  regula- 
tions for  such  territory,  and  therefore  may  sanction  the  exist- 
ence of  slavery  in  it,  and  ought  to  do  it,  in  order  that  the  citi- 
zens of  all  the  States,  slave-holding  and  non-slave-holding,  may 
have  equal  privileges  and  inducements  to  settle  upon  it. 

In  reply  to  this  argument  and  reasoning,  we  say  that  the 
question  is  not  what  Congress  ought  to  do,  nor  what  it  would 
be  wise  or  expedient  or  politic  for  it  to  do,  but  simply  what  has 
it  the  power  to  do  ?  We  by  no  means  admit  that  it  would  be 
wise,  expedient  or  just  in  Congress  to  recognize,  permit  or  es- 
tablish slavery  in  any  new  territory,  under  any  circumstances. 
We  strenuously  maintain  the  contrary.  But  it  is  not  necessary 
to  discuss  this  point,  because  Congress,  even  if  it  thought  it  wise 
or  expedient,  has  not  the  power.  It  is  intrusted  undoubtedly 
with  power  to  make  laws  and  regulations  for  the  new  territo- 
ries of  the  Union ;  but  it  cannot  establish  over  any  territory,  new 
or  old,  any  rules  or  regulations  inconsistent  with  the  spirit,  pur- 
pose and  principles  of  the  constitution,  or  in  violation  of  or  op- 
position to  the  clear  meaning  and  intent  of  its  express  provi- 
sions. All  power  in  the  United  States  Government,  executive, 
legislative  and  judicial,  is  subservient  to  this  instrument,  the 
constitution,  which  is  the  Magna  Charta  of  the  American 
Republic.  The  great  object  of  this  charter,  as  already  stated, 
was  and  is  to  "establish  justice  and  secure  the  blessings  of 
liberty  to  its  framers  and  their  posterity."  As  an  inducement 
to  the  slave-holding  States  existing  at  its  origin  to  assent 
thereto,  they  were  permitted  to  retain  their  slaves  within  their 
own  territory  and  to  increase  them  by  importation  till  1808 — 
and  in  the  one  case  the  restriction  as  to  territory,  is  as  clear  and 
express  as  in  the  other  the  restriction  as  to  time;  in  neither 
case  had  Congress  any  discretionary  right  or  power  given  it. 
The  obligation  of  Congress  to  stqp  the  slave-trade  at  and  after 
1808,  its  utter  incompetency,  without  trampling  upon  the  con- 
stitution, to  permit  or  authorize  by  law  the  continuance  of  that 
traffic  after  that  period,  is  not  more  absolute  and  manifest  than 


77 

its  obligation  to  restrain  slavery  to  the  limits  within  which  it 
was  held  at  the  adoption  of  the  constitution,  and  its  iucompe- 
tency  to  extend  it  by  law  beyond  those  limits.  The  provision 
of  the  constitution,  which  directly,  or  by  implication,  gives  to 
the  government  of  the  United -States  power  to  extend  slavery, 
cannot  be  pointed  out ;  and  any  treaty,  any  purchase,  any  act 
of  Congress,  by  and  through  which  slavery  has  been  thus 
extended,  must  be  regarded  as  unconstitutional — a  violation  of 
the  express  provision,  and  of  the  spirit,  purpose  and  intent  of 
the  constitution — a  violation  and  infringement  not  only  of  the 
claims  of  humanity,  but  of  that  justice  which  it  is  the  object 
of  the  constitution  to  promote,  and  of  those  blessings  of  liberty 
which  it  was  intended  to  secure,  perpetuate  and  diffuse. 

The  very  statement  of  all  the  constitutional  argument  which 
can  be  made  out  for  an  opposite  conclusion,  shows  its  fallacy 
and  weakness.  From  the  proposition,  or  premise,  "  that  slavery 
is  permitted  by  the  constitution  to  exist,  or  is  recognized  as 
existing  within  certain  territory,"  the  conclusion  sought  to  be 
deduced  is, — "  therefore  Congress,  the  law-making  power,  may 
establish  slavery  within  territory  where  it  is  not  permitted  to 
exist,  or  recognized  as  existing,  by  that  instrument."  The 
conclusion  is  a  perfect  non  sequitur.  No  such  power  is  ex- 
pressly conferred  by  that  instrument.  And  the  very  principles 
upon  which,  and  the  great  purposes  for  which,  it  is  declared  to 
have  been  framed  and  adopted,  make  it  impossible  that  any 
such  power  can  be  implied  or  was  intended  to  be  implied. 

It  has  been  urged,  that  slavery  may  be  established  in  the  ter- 
ritories by  the  action  of  their  inhabitants.  These  have  a  right, 
it  is  said,  to  determine  whether  or  not  slavery  shall  be  per- 
mitted to  exist  within  their  borders,  and  if  so  disposed  may 
decide  that  it  shall.  It  requires  no  great  penetration  to  detect 
the  fallacy  of  this  reasoning.  The  territories  belonging  to  the 
United  States,  are  controlled,  directly  or  indirectly,  by  the 
legislation  of  Congress  ;  but  the  legislation  of  Congress  over 
the  territories,  as  well  as  all  its  other  legislation,  is  controlled 
and  restricted  by  the  constitution  of  the  United  States.  The 
people  of  a  territory,  the  moment  said  territory  is  annexed, 
come  under  the  control  of  the  United  States,  and  are  subject  to 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States.  They  can  pass  no  acts, 
make  no  laws,  and  Congress  can  approve  none  that  they  make, 
but  such  as  are  in  harmony  with  the  provisions  and  principles 
of  the  constitution  ;  and  these  provisions  and  principles  forbid 
the  creation,  the  establishment  of  slavery  in  all  territory  where 
it  did  not  exist,  when  the  constitution  was  adopted.  When- 
ever it  is  proposed  to  admit  a  new  territory  into  the  Union  as  a 
State,  its  constitution  must  be  approved  by  Congress,  which 
body  cannot  approve  or  permit  any  thing  therein  which  con- 
8 


7J8 

flicts  with  the  fundamental  principles  and  purpose  of  the  con- 
stitution of  the  United  States — which  are  declared  to  be,  the 
promotion  of  justice  and  the  security  and  perpetuation  of  the 
blessings  of  liberty  ;— and  slavery,  which  is  the  promotion  of 
injustice  and  the  loss  of  liberty  to  thousands,  does  conflict 
with  them.  Congress,  therefore,  in  obedience  to  the  letter  and 
spirit  of  the  constitution,  is  as  much  bound  to  forbid  and  pre- 
vent the  admission  into  the  Union  of  a  slave-holding  State,  as 
of  a  State  establishing  for  its  internal,  domestic  government,  a 
monarchical  form,  with  an  hereditary  king  and  nobles. 

So  in  regard  to  the  treaty-making  power,  it  is  said  that  trea- 
ties are  the  supreme  law  of  the  land,  and,  therefore,  when 
territory  is  acquired  by  treaty,  in  which  slavery  exists,  such 
treaty  may  rightfully  stipulate  that  slavery  shall  be  continued. 
This  conclusion  has  no  foundation.  Treaties,  rightfully  made, 
are  undoubtedly  the  supreme  law  of  the  land  ;  but  the  ques- 
tion whether  they  are  rightfully  made,  is  a  question  to  be  de- 
termined by  the  constitution  ;  and  no  treaty  which  infringes 
that,  can  be  regarded  as  the  law  of  this  country.  Congress  has 
no  power  to  make  a  treaty,  any  of  the  provisions  of  which  are 
in  violation  of  the  fundamental  principles  and  purpose  of  the 
constitution.  Congress  has  no  more  power  to  acquire  territory 
by  treaty,  in  which  treaty  it  is  stipulated  that  a  certain  number 
and  class  of  inhabitants  of  that  territory  and  their  posterity, 
shall  be  held  as  slaves,  than  it  has  to  acquire  territory  by  treaty, 
in  which  treaty  it  is  stipulated,  that  all  the  inhabitants  of  all 
classes  in  that  territory  shall  be  held  as  slaves.  And  its  ap- 
proval of  these  treaties,  in  the  one  case  or  the  other,  would  not 
be  more  wrong  and  inhuman,  than  it  would,  in  both  cases,  be 
unconstitutional.  It  cannot  be  made  out  from  the  constitution, 
that  Congress  has  the  power,  either  direct  or  implied,  to  extend 
slavery.  If  Congress  has  not  the  power  to  extend,  it  must  and 
ought  to  restrain  it.  This  conclusion  necessarily  follows  ;  be- 
cause the  very  provisions  which  show  that  Congress  has  not 
the  power  to  extend  slavery,  prove  that  in  adhering  to  and 
maintaining  these  provisions,  it  must  restrain  it.  It  is  intended 
by  the  constitution  to  be  restrained  to  the  territory  within 
which  it  was  included  at  the  adoption  of  the  constitution  ;  and 
all  extension  of  it  beyond  those  limits  has  been  made,  not  by 
an  adherence  to  the  compromises  (as  they  are  called)  and  pur- 
poses of  the  constitution,  but  in  disregard  and  violation  of 
them. 

The  connection  between  slavery  and  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  involves  one  other  point  of  interest,  viz.,  the 
District  of  Columbia.  Congress  having  exclusive  legislation 
over  this  District,  it  is  contended,  on  the  one  hand,  that  it  may 
and  ought  to  abolish  slavery  ;  and,  on  the  other,  that  it  cannot 


79 

rightfully,  and  therefore  ought  not  to  do  this.  Undoubtedly 
there  are  nice  and  delicate  points,  both  of  equity  and  constitu- 
tional law,  involved  in  this  matter,  which  we  have  not  time  or 
ability  to  discuss.  One  or  two  points,  however,  would  seem  to 
be  very  clear. 

If  Congress  has  exclusive  legislation  over  the  District,  it  has 
exclusive  control  of  this  matter  of  slavery  in  the  District,  and 
can  do  three  things. 

1.  It  can  prohibit  the  introduction  of  slaves  into  the  District 
from  other  States,  and  their  sale  in  the  District,  to  be  trans- 
ferred into  other  States  ;  and  thus  greatly  diminish  the  evil  of 
the  institution,  and  entirely  prevent  the  District  from  being 
and  continuing  the  great  slave  mart  of  the  Union. 

2.  It  can  abolish  slavery  immediately,  and  forever  ;   and  if 
the  act  of  abolition  contained  a  provision  to  pay  the  masters 
the  full   value  of  their  slaves,  no  advocate  of  slavery  could 
complain  that  injustice  was  done  to  the  masters. 

3.  It  can  pass  a  law  of  prospective  abolition — a  law  provid- 
ing that  all  persons  within  the  District,  on  and  after  a  certain^ 
specified  time,  shall  be  free,  without  providing  any  compensa- 
tion to  the  masters.     Such  a  law  could  not,  justly,  be  regarded 
as  an  infringement  of  the  private  right  of  property  ;  because, 
in  this  case,  the  supposed  right  of  property  is  too  remote  and 
contingent  to  be    made  the  foundation  of  public  wrong.     It 
would  be  in  accordance  with  the  legislation  of  several  of  the 
largest  States  which  have  abolished  slavery. 

Till,  then,  some  such  laws  are  passed,  and  provision  made 
for  its  extinction,  the  Constitution,  the  Congress,  and  the 
WHOLE  PEOPLE  of  the  United  States  are  responsible  before  the 
world,  for  the  e^il  and  the  wrong,  the  shame  and  the  disgrace 
of  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  and  in  all  the  Territo- 
ries of  the  United  States. 


We  have  incidentally  referred  above  to  the  right  of  property 
in  slaves,  as  it  would  be  affected  by  emancipation.  The  dis- 
tinct "statement  of  a  few  general  principles — principles  which 
have  indeed  been  implied,  throughout  all  this  discussion — may 
serve,  perhaps,  to  strengthen  our  position. 

1.  One  man  has  no  natural  right  of  property  in  another. 
This  proposition  is  so  nearly  self-evident,  that  no  argument  can 
be  necessary  in  support  of  it,  and  no  illustration  render  it 
clearer.  To  assume  the  existence  of  such  a  right  is,  in  effect, 


80 

to  deny  that  mankind  are  of  one  nature,  and  that  God  "  hath 
made  of  one  blood  all  nations  of  men," — to  sanction  wars  of 
classes  and  races  upon  one  another  for  their  mutual  subjugation, 
— to  justify  a  state* of  enmity  between  neighbors, — to  repudiate 
the  great  Christian  law  of  "doing  unto  others  as  we  would 
that  they  should  do  unto  us," — to  maintain  the  propriety  of 
robbery  and  violence,  arid  thus  to  subvert  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciples of  morality  as  declared  in  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  and 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ. 

2.  As  one  man  has  no  natural  right  of  property  in  another, 
neither  can  he  acquire  that  right,  so  that  the  possession  shall  be 
unqualified  and  absolute,  or  a  perfect  ownership.     The  only 
mode  in  which  he  may  acquire  it  at  all,  except  in  the  case  of 
punishment  for  crime,  is  by  purchase  or  gift  from  the  real  own- 
er— as  when  one  man  sells  or  surrenders  to  another  his  own 
time,  liberty,  skill  and  strength.     But   "  the  things  of  a  man  " 
which  he  may  not  justly  sell  or  relinquish,  cannot  justly  be 
bought  or  taken  from  him.     Thus  the  rights  of  conscience,  the 
responsibilities  of  a  soul  made  in  the  image  of  God,  freedom  to 
do  right  and  to  refuse  to  do  wrong,  the  capacity  of  improve- 
ment, the  obligations  of  religion,  are  not  disposable  possessions. 
He  who  wrests  them  from  another,  as  well  as  he  who  volunta- 
rily resigns  them,  violates  the  laws  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
No  man  may  sell  them  or  in  any  way  part  with  them  ;  no  man 
may  buy  them  or  in  any  way  take  them  from  another.     They 
are  inalienable.     Now,  if  slavery  were  the  result  of  a  contract, 
that  fact  would  relieve  it,  in  some  degree,  of  its  enormity  ;  but 
even  then,  the  contract  would  be  void  ;  inasmuch  as  it  takes 
from  the  slave  what  no  one  has  a  right  either  to  sell  or  to  pur- 
chase, to  give  or  to  receive.     But  slavery,  instead  of  being  the 
result  of  a  contract,  has  its  origin  in  arbitrary  power,  and  is 
maintained  by  the  continued  exercise  of  that  power. 

3.  The  principles  of  natural  right  and  justice  are  universal 
and   immutable.      They   are   modified    by    no   circumstances 
which  man  can  control,  and  subject  to  no  exceptions  which  he 
may   choose.     They   can    be  violated  with   impunity  by  no 
earthly  power.     They  apply  to  men  organized  in  society,  act- 
ing through  institutions  and  laws  and  acted  upon   by  them, 
with  the  same  force  and  to  the  same  extent  as  to  separate  indi- 
viduals;   that  which  is  contrary  to  those  principles  and  forbid- 
den by  them  in  the  one  case   being  equally  contrary  to  'them 
and  forbidden  by  them  in  the  other.     It  hence  follows,  that  if 
one  man  has  no  natural  right  of  property  in  another,  the  state, 
or  body  politic,  has  no  such  right  ;  and,  therefore,  that  the  as- 
sumption of  that  right  in  the  form  of  constitutions  and  laws  by 
which  men  are  taken  and  declared  to  be  property,  is  an  unright- 
eous usurpation. 


81 

4.  But  as  no  society  is  organized  upon  pure  principles  of 
Right  and  Justice,  and  the  wisest  human  legislation  is  but  an 
approximation,  more  or  less  distant,  to  Perfect  Law,  a  question 
arises  as  to  the  extent  to  which  allegiance  is  due  to  the  state 
when  its  requirements,  as  in  the  case  of  laws  enforcing  slavery, 
are  manifestly  founded  in  injustice.  We  answer  this  question, 
without  scruple,  by  saying,  that  it  is  the  duty  of  those  who,  by 
their  position,  are  subject  to  such  requirements,  to  submit  to 
them  only  as  far  as  is  necessary  for  the  integrity  and  peace  of 
the  state.  As  overt  resistance  would  be  insurrectionary  and 
seditious,  so  patient  arid  uncomplaining  acquiescence  would  be 
inconsistent  with  the  law  of  love  to  man,  and  with  the  spirit  of 
that  religion  which  inculcates  "  deliverance  to  the  captives," 
and  whose  office  it  is  to  "  break  every  yoke  "  but  that  which 
itself  imposes. 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind,  in  this  connection,  that  the  Idea 
of  a  state  is  one  thing  and  the  Fact  another.  Sagacious, 
thoughtful,  and  good  men  have  always  a  vision  of  an  order  of 
society  more  or  less  in  advance  of  that  in  which  they  live. 
Indeed,  that  vision  is  common  to  man.  Every  where  the  Idea 
of  society  is  above  the  Reality,  and  is  prophetic  of  change  and 
improvement.  Now,  it  is  clearly  incumbent  on  all,  while  sub- 
mitting, by  a  moral  necessity,  and  to  the  extent  of  that  neces- 
sity, to  imperfect  institutions  and  unjust  and  oppressive  laws,  to 
use  their  utmost  exertions  to  improve  those  institutions  and 
change  those  laws  ;  endeavoring  to  make  the  Fact  correspond  to 
the  Idea  of  a  state,  to  bring  its  spirit  and  life  into  harmony  with 
the  abstract  principles  of  Right  and  Justice. 

It  is,  therefore,  the  duty  of  the  people  of  the  United  States 
to  submit  to  the  laws  of  the  land  in  their  recognition  and  sup- 
port of  slavery,  so  far  and  only  so  far  as  the  integrity  and  peace 
of  the  state  require  such  submission  ;  while  it  is  demanded  of 
them  by  all  the  principles  of  justice  and  humanity,  and  by 
every  attribute  of  God,  to  use  all  peaceful  means  in  their  power 
to  annul  those  laws,  and  thus  to  redeem  their  fellow-men  in 
bondage  from  that  condition  of  degradation  and  cruelty  in 
which  they  are  held  as  property,  and  bought  and  sold  like 
brutes. 

We  do  not  deny,  but  acknowledge  the  legal  right  of  property 
in  slaves.  We  admit  that  "that  is  property"  for  the  time 
being  "which  the  law  declares  to  be  property."  We  would 
not  counsel  interference  with  the  slave-holders  in  their  exercise 
of  this  right  as  long  as  it  exists.  But  we  assert  that  all  laws 
sanctioning  or  upholding  slavery  and  giving  to  man  property  in 
man,  are  contrary  to  justice  and  humanity  and  in  direct  viola- 
tion of  the  precepts  of  Christianity  ;  and  that,  on  this  account, 
it  is  the  duty  of  all  good  citizens  in  all  parts  of  the  country, 
8* 


82 

and  especially  of  the  professed  disciples  of  Christ,  to  demand 
their  immediate  abrogation.  We  cannot  doubt  that  this  is  the 
sentiment  of  a  large  majority  of  the  people  of  the  United  States, 
nor  that  it  is  daily  spreading,  and  acquiring  intensity  and 
strength  ;  »or,  still  further,  that  it  is  destined,  at  no  remote  pe- 
riod, to  render  slavery  as  universally  odious  as  it  is  manifestly 
unjust.  If  we  are  not  to  be  disappointed  in  this  expectation, 
and  if  loss  of  property  ensues  from  its  fulfilment  to  those  whose 
accumulations  are  in  the  bones  and  sinews  and  blood  of  their 
fellow-men,  they  will  suffer  only  that  which  is  incident  to  all 
property  held  under  laws  that  are  liable  to  be  changed  at  the 
discretion  of  the  sovereign  power ;  and  they  will  have  no  more 
claim  to  indemnity  on  the  score  of  justice,  than  that  which  may 
be  urged  in  behalf  of  those  who,  from  a  like  cause,  may  suffer 
depreciation  or  total  loss  of  any  other  species  of  property. 

Yet,  if  it  should  be  made  to  appear  that  the  abolition  of 
slavery  would  be  followed  by  great  loss  and  general  distress  in 
that  part  of  the  country  where  the  institution  is  established,  the 
principles  of  the  gospel  would  demand  that  the  other  and 
stronger  parts  should  share  a  burden  thus  created,  and  imposed 
by  regard  to  the  common  good  and  in  obedience  to  the  dictates 
of  humanity  arid  religion  ;  nor  can  it  for  a  moment  be  question- 
ed that  the  people  of  the  free  States  would  cheerfully  and  with 
large  liberality  cooperate  with  their  brethren  of  the  slave  States 
in  remedying  the  inconveniences  and  alleviating  the  pecuniary 
evils  which  might  be  the  temporary  result  of  emancipation. 

But  while  avowing  this  opinion  we  do  not  hesitate  to  declare 
our  belief,  that,  instead  of  pecuniary  loss  and  other  disadvan- 
tages, the  abolition  of  slavery  would  be  followed  by  an  increase 
of  wealth,  thrift,  general  intelligence,  and  comfort,  throughout 
the  slave  States.  The  path  of  justice  and  mercy  is  not  a  way 
of  darkness,  but  "like  the  shining  light,  that  shineth  more  and 
more  unto  the  perfect  day."  Sterility,  want,  anarchy  and  crime 
have  never  been  the  consequences,  amongst  any  people,  of  loy- 
alty to  God  and  supreme  devotion  to  the  principles  of  righteous- 
ness ;  on  the  contrary,  fealty  to  God  and  respect  for  the  rights 
of  his  children, — especially  of  the  weak,  ignorant,  and  defence- 
less,— surely  bring  with  them,  both  by  the  general  laws  of  the 
world  and  the  special  dispensations  of  heaven,  the  best  bless- 
ings that  fall  to  the  lot  of  man  in  the  social  state. 

We  do  not  here  go  into  the  question  of  the  relations  which 
will  subsist  between  masters  and  slaves  after  emancipation 
takes  place,  but  content  ourselves  with  observing,  that  there  is 
wisdom  enough  in  the  country  to  devise,  arid  power  enough  to 
execute,  measures  for  the  equal  advantage  of  both  ;  and  that, — 
whether  by  apprenticeship,  by  voluntary  colonization,  or  by 
labor  for  wages,  we  do  not  presume  to  determine  the  precise 


83 

mode — in  our  judgment,  the  slaves,  when  set  free,  will  be  less 
burdensome,  and  a  cause  of  less  perplexity  and  trouble  to  the 
white  inhabitants  of  the  slave-holding  States,  than  they  are, 
while,  as  at  present,  in  a  condition  of  bondage.  It  is  not,  how- 
ever, on  any  economical  grounds  that  we  urge  emancipation. 
We  cannot  fail  to  take  a  higher  and  broader  view  of  the  sub- 
ject. We  rest  our  demand  on  the  inviolable  laws  of  Justice, 
on  the  eternal  principles  of  Humanity,  on  the  irreversible  dic- 
tates of  Religion  in  the  soul,  and  on  the  Revelation  by  Jesus 
Christ  of  the  perfect  will  of  God. 


In  conclusion  of  this  Report,  it  only  remains  to  present  some 
of  those  motives  and  considerations  which  should  induce  all 
the  citizens  of  this  country  to  seek  the  extinction  of  slavery 
within  its  borders. 

These  considerations  must  have  suggested  themselves,  indeed, 
at  eve'ry  stage  of  the  preceding  discussion.  It  is  impossible  to 
sketch  the  real  features  of  the  slave-system,  without  perceiving 
the  impregnable  strength  of  the  argument  against  it.  Slavery  is 
its  own  impeachment ;  its  own  condemnation.  As  the  legal  idea 
of  the  system  is  to  make  MAN  property,  so  its  inevitable  result — 
however  its  inherent  wrongs  may  be  mitigated  by  the  compassion 
of  individual  masters — is  to  crush  whatever  is  noblest  in  human- 
ity beneath  the  weight  of  its  chain.  Mind  must  be  fettered,  as 
well  as  the  limbs  ;  for  the  first  real  waking  of  intellect  will  be 
the  signal  of  insurrection.  And  if  affection,  conscience,  the 
soul  itself  still  live  in  the  breast  of  the  bondman,  it  is  because 
the  hand  of  man  cannot  extinguish  the  flame  which  God  en- 
kindled, and  not  because  there  is  any  mercy  in  the  nature  of 
slavery.  It  is  a  cruel  taunt  to  speak  of  the  provision  for  the 
physical  comfort  of  the  slave,  which  may  be  made — even 
though  he  never  knew  hunger  or  nakedness,  and  never  bled 
beneath  the  lash — as  a  real  mitigation  of  this  towering  wrong. 
It  is  a  worse  cruelty  to  speak  of  his  apparent  happiness  as  any 
alleviation,  when  humanity  must  be  torn  out  of  his  being  to 
make  him  happy  amidst  his  bonds  ; — nay,  not  happy — for  we 
will  not  profanely  use  a  word  which  is  sometimes  applied  to 
thoughts  of  divine  joy — but  to  make  him  wear  the  sad  show 
of  happiness.  No  argument,  no  appeal,  can  add  one  particle  of 
force  to  this  simple  statement,  could  it  be  fully  made.  Every 
human  heart  would  know  by  intuition,  unless  every  manly 
'feeling  had  perished,  that  the  instincts  of  humanity  and  the 
spirit  of  Christ  alike  condemned  it.  As  well  might  we  attempt 


to  prove  that  the  condition  of  the  lost  soul — once  opened  in  the 
depths  of  its  woe — was  not  the  bliss  of  heaven.  The  real 
office  of  any  appeal  upon  such  a  theme  can  only  be  to  bring 
the  public  mind  and  heart  into  a  condition  to  see  the  simple 
truth, — to  take  the  film  from  our  eyes,  so  that  the  light  which 
is  shining  all  around  us  may  stream  into  our  souls, — to  present 
the  question  itself,  separated  from  all  evasions,  stripped  of  all 
disguises,  before  the  bar  of  conscience. 

We  present  no  motives,  no  considerations,  therefore,  as  the 
basis  of  our  appeal,  except  those  which  belong  to  the  domain 
of  conscience.  We  should  be  false  to  our  Master,  if  we  did 
not  place  high  above  all  other  thoughts,  those  everlasting  truths 
of  God,  by  which  individuals  and  nations  must  be  judged. 
However  men  may  regard  such  reasoning,  we  can  recognize  no 
other  standard.  The  disastrous  effects  of  slavery  upon  a  na- 
tion's true  prosperity,  the  curse  that  it  brings  upon  labor,  the 
idleness  and  improvidence  that  it  engenders — which  prove  it 
to  be  equally  a  mistake  and  a  crime — we  do  not  present  in  any 
prominence.  These  results — which, 'considered  entirely  apart 
from  its  sad  effects  upon  character,  the  reeking  sensualities  it 
produces — blight  the  territories  long  defiled  by  its  presence,  as 
the  drought  withers  every  green  thing  in  nature  ; — these  results 
are  impertinent  in  this  higher  discussion.  We  admire  that  Prov- 
idence which  always  unites  true  prosperity  with  obedience  to 
God's  everlasting  law.  We  look  with  shuddering  awe  upon 
the  sure  connection  between  sin  and  suffering  ;  sometimes 
making  the  physical  frame  the  slave  of  the  intoxicating  cup, 
for  instance,  the  minister  of  a  torture  that  is  a  fit  image  of  hell ; 
giving,  in  some  such,  example,  an  illustration  of  a  law  that 
runs  through  the  whole  universe  of  life.  But  the  bright  result 
in  the  one  case,  or  the  woe  in  the  other,  must  not  come  into 
the  scale,  when  we  weigh  the  eternal  obligation  of  Christian 
truth.  Even  if  it  could  be  true,  under  the  government  of  God, 
that  slavery  might  secure  the  blessings  which  come  as  a  crowd 
of  attending  angels  around  the  steps  of  freedom,  and  liberty 
produced  the  blight  of  slavery,  we  should  regard  it  like  the 
temptation  of  the  crown  of  the  whole  earth  to  Jesus — a  thought 
to  be  instantly  rejected  with  unspeakable  aversion,  in  this  sol- 
emn estimate  of  right. 

We  notice  two  or  three  particulars  in  harmony  with  this 
general  position.  It  is  imperatively  demanded  of  the  citizens 
of  this  country,  to  seek  the  extinction  of  slavery  within  its 
borders,  with  untiring  earnestness,  if  they  would  preserve  the 
very  ideas  which  have  made  this  nation  what  it  is,  as  a  living 
influence  in  its  heart.  Men  do  not  often  realize  the  greatness 
of  the  calamity,  when  they  partially  lose  the  ideas  which  have* 
been  their  inspiration.  No  loss  is  so  great  as  the  loss  of  faith 


85 

in  eternal  principles.  The  life  of  genius  sinks  into  weakness, 
if  not  wild  passion  ;  the  martyr  loses  his  soul  of  sacrifice  ;  the 
disciple  faints  in  his  devotion,  and  turns  away  from  his  God, 
when  faith  grows  dim.  To  lose  the  influence  of  these  great 
ideas,  is  like  tearing  the  sun  from  his  sphere.  And  the  gloom 
which  would  then  cover  the  world,  would  only  be  an  image  of 
this  darkness  and  desolation  in  the  soul.  All  the  great  things 
in  the  world  have  been  the  result  of  faith  in  those  grand 
thoughts  of  freedom,  of  holiness,  of  right,  that  have  inspired 
their  votaries.  And  where  these  are  not,  the  whole  mind  is 
stricken  with  idiocy  and  palsy.  When  these  are  gone,  the 
abomination  of  desolation  already  stands  in  the  holy  place 
wherein  thoughts  and  deeds  have  their  birth,  and  the  far-seeing 
mind  then  can  only  wait,  with  tears,  the  coming  of  that  de- 
struction which  shall  not  leave  one  stone  upon  another  in  the 
temple  which  was  loved  and  reverenced. 

And  this  inspiring  faith  can  only  be  preserved  by  constant 
watchfulness :  it  cannot  live  in  the  presence,  the  atmosphere 
of  sin, — when  silent  over  the  enormity.  Wherever  slavery 
exists,  there  must  be  ceaseless  war  against  its  wrongs,  or  the 
sentiment  of  liberty  will  gradually  die.  This  is  the  conclusion 
of  reason  and  the  teaching  of  experience.  Our  national  his- 
tory proves  it.  Liberty  has  doubtless  been  faithfully  hallowed 
in  the  reverence  of  multitudes.  Free  principles  will  vindicate 
themselves,  sooner  or  later,  among  this  people.  Yet  the  proofs 
are  painfully  clear,  that  something  of  that  faith  in  the  idea  of 
liberty  which  made  the  Fathers  great,  has  ceased  to  exist  in 
these  later  generations.  In  the  days  when  the  constitution  was 
formed,  slavery  was  permitted  to  exist,  for  a  little  period,  that 
it  might  prepare  itself  to  die.  Whoever  studies  the  sentiment 
of  that  day,  will  see  that  men  no  more  intended  the  perpetua- 
tion of  human  slavery  in  this  republic,  than  again  to  place  the 
yoke  which  they  had  broken  upon  their  own  necks.  Mark  the 
contrast.  One  of  the  first  acts  of  national  legislation  then, 
was  to  prohibit  slavery  in  all  that  territory  which  had  not  been 
formed  into  States.  In  a  later  time,  we  admit  States  that  pro- 
hibit the  abolition  of  slavery  forever.  Then,  all  the  territories 
which  belonged  to  the  country  were  declared  to  be  free.  In  a 
later  age,  we  receive  new  regions,  far  wider  than  mighty  em- 
pires, in  which  we  sanction  human  bondage,  or  do  what  differs 
only  in  form  from  its  direct  establishment.  Then,  slavery,  as 
upon  its  bended  knees,  pleaded  for  a  brief  delay  in  the  execu- 
tion of  the  sentence  of  death  which  seemed  to  be  issued  against 
it  in  the  fundamental  principles  of  the  republic,  and  the  living 
spirit  of  the  nation.  In  a  later  generation,  slavery  has  some- 
times assumed  the  dominion,  so  that  liberty  herself  has  been 
dumb  in  its  presence.  We  have  nothing  to  do  with  parties,  in 


86 

such  statements  as  these.  We  only  present  the  simple  facts. 
Is  it  only  a  dream,  then,  to  suppose  that  the  very  ideas  which 
made  us  a  people  might  be  slowly  consumed  out  of  the  nation's 
heart  by  this  canker  of  slavery  ?  Is  it  a  vain  thought  of  alarm 
that  we  are  uttering,  or  is  it  a  solemn  warning  of  one  law 
which  is  over  men  and  nations — whose  proofs  are  in  all  ages, 
arid  in  our  own  history,  too,  when  we  ask  for  a  renewed  and 
perpetual  faithfulness  to  the  principle  of  freedom, — a  faithful- 
ness that  admits  no  compromise  with  slavery, — if  we  would 
preserve  ourselves  or  this  people  from  a  deep  degeneracy. 

Another  consideration  is  directly  suggested  here,  why  the 
citizens  of  this  nation  should  seek  the  extinction  of  slavery. 
A  merely  silent  acquiescence  in  its  claims  to  exist, — much 
more  their  recognition, — in  one  word,  any  thing  less  than  an 
untiring  Christian  opposition,  deadens  the  moral  sense,  and 
tends  to  abrogate  the  law  of  right  and*  justice  in  the  heart  of 
the  whole  people.  Scarcely  any  word  is  so  popular  as  com- 
promise, even  in  the  heart  of  Christendom.  And  there  is  one 
sphere  of  action,  in  which  it  may  have  a  rightful  sway,  where 
all  must  give  it  homage.  In  the  clashings  of  outward  inter- 
ests, in  most  of  the  strifes  of  individuals  and  nations,  it  is  but 
another  name  for  the  sweet- spirit  of  peace, — alike  Christian  in 
its  nature  and  in  its  manifestations.  But  when  we  enter  the 
domain  of  moral  truth,  it  should  be  a  banished  word  ;  shunned 
there  as  much  as  it  is  welcomed  everywhere  beside.  Conscience 
never  compromises,  except  when  it  sins.  Jesus,  amidst  all  his 
gentleness,  never  looks  with  his  full  approval,  while  one  thing 
is  lacking.  It  is  a  spiritual  law,  that  an  individual  soul  can 
never  retain  one  admitted  wrong,  without  serious  injury  to 
the  whole  moral  nature.  So  it  is  with  a  state.  No  moral 
influence  .can  be  more  disastrous  than  the  incorporation  of  a 
great  injustice  in  the  institution  of  a  nation  ;  so  that  men,  by 
their  allegiance  to  government,  seem  to  be  constrained  to  de- 
fend the  sin, — and  obedience  to  the  law  of  man  requires  diso- 
bedience to  the  law  of  God,— and  acts  of  simple  righteousness 
become  acts  of  treason.  A  state  which  throws  the  sanction  of 
law  over  injustice,  so  far  as  that  wrong  is  concerned,  diffuses 
a  universal  contagion  which  is  more  fearful,  we  might  better 
say,  perhaps,  more  to  be  feared  than  the  pestilence.  We  state 
a  point  that  many  may  scarcely  regard  ;  but  in  that  deadness 
to  all  living  sensibility  may  be  found  one  great  proof  of  its 
truth.  We  could  scarcely  present  the  special  illustrations  of 
the  evil  which  we  deplore,  without  seeming  to  enter  into  par- 
tisan discussions.  Yet  crowds  of  illustrations  must  occur  to  all 
who  have  carefully  observed  the  history,  the  legislation,  the 
political  movements  of  the  nation.  Who  can  estimate  the 
number  of  those  whose  sense  of  justice,  and  whose  allegiance 


r  v  87 

to  truth' have  been  corrupted  by  the  compromise  of  pure  princi- 
ples, of  the  law  of  God,  before  the  claims  of  the  slave-system  ? 
At  times,  public  righteousness  almost  seems  as  a  moral  impos- 
sibility, while  this  mighty  temptation  to  integrity  remains. 
There  is  no  safeguard  for  the  purity  of  the  moral  sense  of  this 
people,  except  in  a  perpetual  labor  for  the  overthrow  of  this 
great  institution  of  human  bondage.  We  must  vindicate  the 
truth,  that  considerations  of  right  are  higher  than  those  of  expe- 
diency in  the  government  of  states,  as  well  as  in  the  life  of 
single  souls, — that  where  justice  is  brought  into  question,  com- 
promise must  only  be  injustice,  under  another  and  a  tempting 
name. 

These  are  considerations  which  apply  to  men  in  all  sections 
of  the  country,  to  a  greater  or  less  degree.  Were  we  to  attempt 
to  show  the  sad  results  of  slavery  upon  the  moral  condition  of 
those  who  are  owners  of  slaves,  or  who  live  in  its  immediate 

§resence,  the  materials  for  the  argument  are  most  abundant, 
ome  men  may  live  in  a  land  of  slavery,  and  yet  be  free  from 
its  corruptions,  as  some  may  live  amidst  contagion  and  pesti- 
lence, unharmed.  But  we  know  the  natural  results  of  such 
exposures  of  body  and  of  soul.  If  there  is  any  meaning  in  the 
quick  beating  of  the  pulse  at  the  name  of  liberty — any  reason 
in  the  enthusiasm  and  sacrifice  of  her  hosts  of  martyrs — if  the 
creative  idea  of  this  people,  the  fundamental  thought  of  its 
government  was  not  a  splendid  cheat, — then  slavery  is  a  condi- 
tion involving  degradations  and  wrongs,  which  should  make 
men  welcome  death  as  a  blessed  angel  of  deliverance,  in  com- 
parison with  its  woe.  We  know  enough  of  the  thraldom  of 
the  soul  in  the  breast  of  the  slave — of  the  laceration  of  his 
purest  affections,  which  must  be  where  slavery  is.  We  know 
enough  of  the  cruelties  and  loathsome  licentiousness  which 
"will  be  among  many  of  the  masters.  We  know  what  a  system 
must  be  that  which  tempts  men  to  raise  human  beings — their 
own  flesh  and  blood — for  the  slave-market ; — and  which  can 
extinguish  the  love  of  their  own  children,  until  they  will  sell 
them  like  cattle.  We  know  what  a  system  must  be,  which 
renders  it  more  dangerous  to  spread  the  Bible  among  these  be- 
nighted three  millions  of  our  brothers  and  our  sisters,  than  for 
the  missionary  to  go  into  the  thick  night  of  heathenism  with 
the  light  of  life. 

We  forbear  from  this  whole  topic,  and  from  farther  special 
suggestions.  We  base  our  whole  appeal,  we  repeat,  upon  the 
instant  protest  of  humanity  itself  against  the  idea  of  slavery, 
and  the  eternal  opposition  between  it  and  the  law  of  Christ. 
The  first,  every  man  feels ;  and  the  last,  however  some  may 
qualify  their  words,  we  believe  that  every  Christian  knows. 
This  want  of  perception  of  the  absolutely  unchristian  nature  of 


88 

the  institution  of  'Slavery  is  a  terrible  fiction,  which*  results 
from  perpetual  compromisings  of  simple  truth.  Men  begin  by 
questioning  if  religion  demands  an  immediate  abolition  of  hu- 
man bondage,  and  then  the  passage  is  easy  to  its  toleration,  to 
silence  over  its  wrongs,  to  admission  of  its  right  to  live  beneath 
Christian  institutions— perhaps  to  its  positive  defence. 

The  call  of  humanity  and  of  Christ  our  Lord  is  the  great, 
imperative  CONSIDERATION,  the  grand,  all-powerful  MOTIVE  for 
action.  Shall  it  not  be  heard  ?  It  belongs  to  no  section — to 
no  party.  It  cannot  recognize  geographical  lines.  Humanity 
lives  everywhere.  Christ's  truth  is  the  law  for  all  souls  and 
all  climes. 

Shall  not  the  call  be  obeyed  ?  Rather,  we  ask,  who  will 
presume  to  neglect  or  disobey  it  ?  We  do  not  insist  upon 
special  methods  of  action.  We  only  insist  that  the  protest  be 
decided  and  clear — in  the  name  of  humanity  ;  in  the  infinitely 
greater  name  of  Almighty  God.  Let  the  action  be  Christian  in 
its  gentleness,  but  Christian  also  in  its  fidelity.  Shall  the  citi- 
zens of  a  nation  whose  foundation  was  laid  upon  the  doctrine 
of  Human  Rights,  practically  sanction  the  idea  which  a  dis- 
tinguished statesman  has  advanced  with  a  daring  consistency, 
"  that  the  great  thought  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  is 
a  fiction  ; "  or  shall  we  vindicate  that  Christian  doctrine  by  a 
consistent  obedience  ?  Shall  this  land  be  the  last  asylum  of 
slavery  when  driven  from  other  nations,  Christian  and  un- 
christian, with  execrations,  or  shall  it  be  truly  free  ?  Shall  we 
cling  to  the  sin  amidst  the  increasing  light  of  ages',  or  trample 
it  beneath  our  feet  in  the  love  of  liberty,  and  of  man  ? 

Will  such  a  call  prevail  ?  As  God  liveth,  it  cannot  fail. 
The  world  is  filled  with  signs  of  hope.  The  idea  of  human 
rights  shakes  every  throne.  Freedom  is  becoming  the  omnipo- 
tent word.  The  shouts  of  the  emancipated  are  heard  from  the  f 
isles  of  the  sea,  and  across  the  ocean.  The  sacred  contest  for 
freedom  is  begun  in  our  own  land.  There  can  be  no  defeat, 
except  through  unfaithfulness.  It  does  not  become  the  disci- 
ples of  the  Christian  faith  to  question  the  supreme  power  of 
simple  truth,  when  the  whole  history  of  their  religion  attests  it 
— when  its  grand  purpose  is  to  pour  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  into 
the  souls  of  all  his  followers,  as  the  life  of  the  vine  flows  into 
all  its  branches. 


In  the  spirit  of  Freedom,  then,  which  animated  our  Fathers, 
and  in  the  name  and  for  the  glory  of  Christ,  "  who  died  that 
we  might  live," — it  well  becomes  the  Convention  of  the  Con- 


89 

gregational  Ministers  of  this  ancient  Commonwealth,  solemnly 
to  declare  to  the  world  their  deep  conviction  of  THE  INJUSTICE 
AND  INHUMANITY  of  the  system  of  Slavery,  and  of  its  absolute 
repugnance  to  ALL  THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  THE  WORD  OF  GOD  : 
and  to  implore  those  who  are  implicated  in  it — by  their  fear 
of  God  and  their  love  of  man — to  break  their  own  bonds,  by 
using  their  best  exertions  to  give  liberty  to  all  captives.  And 
may  "the  Father  of  lights"  and  "of  mercies"  hasten  the  day, 
when,  "  in  the  fullness  of  the  blessing  of  the  gospel  of  Christ," 
the  choral  anthem  of  our  land  and  of  the  whole  world  may  be, 
with  joy  and  gratitude  unspeakable, — "WHERE  THE  SPIRIT  OF 

THE    LORD    IS,    THERE    IS    LlBERTY  !  " 

.  CHARLES  LOWELL. 
CALVIN  HITCHCOCK. 
RICHARD  S.  STORRS. 
JAMES  W.  THOMPSON. 
SAMUEL  M.  WORCESTER. 
GEORGE  W.  BRIGGS. 
ALONZO  HILL. 
SAxMUEL  K.  LOTHROP. 


APPENDIX. 


AN  extract  from  the  "  Madison  Papers."  relative  to  the  right  of 
suffrage,  will  illustrate  the  spirit  of  the  Convention  of  1787. 

Mr.  King  wished  to  know  what  influence  the  vote  just  passed  was 
meant  to  have  on  the  succeeding  part  of  the  Report,  concerning  the 
admission  of  slaves  into  the  rule  of  representation.  He  could  not 
reconcile  his  mind  to  the  Article,  if  it  was  to  prevent  objections  to  the 
latter  part.  The  admission  of  slaves  was  a  most  grating  circumstance 
to  his  mind,  and  he  believed  would  be  so  to  a  great  part  of  the  people 
of  America.  He  had  not  made  a  strenuous  opposition  to  it  hereto- 
fore, because  he  had  hoped  thai  this  concession  would  have  produced 
a  readiness,  which  had  not.been  manifested,  to  strengthen  the  General 
Government,  and  to  mark  a  full  confidence  in  it.  The  Report  under 
consideration  had,  by  the  tenor  of  it,  put  an  end  to  all  those  hopes. 
In  two  great  points  the  hands  of  the  Legislature  were  absolutely  tied. 
The  importation  of  slaves  could  not  be  prohibited.  Exports  could  not 
be  taxed.  Is  this  reasonable  ?  What  are  the  great  objects  of  the 
general  system  ?  First,  defence  against  foreign  invasion  ;  secondly, 
against  internal  sedition.  Shall  all  the  States,  then,  be  bound  to  de- 
fend each,  and  shall  each  be  at  liberty  to  introduce  a  weakness  which 
will  render  defence  more  difficult  ?  Shall  one  part  of  the  United 
States  be  bound  to  defend  another  part,  and  that  other  part  be  at  lib- 
erty, not  only  to  increase  its  own  danger,  but  to  withhold  the  compen- 
sation for  the  burden?  If  slaves  are  to  be  imported,  shall  not  the 
exports  produced  by  their  labor  supply  a  revenue  the  better  to  enable 
the  General  Government  to  defend  their  masters  ?  There  was  so  much 
inequality  and  unreasonableness  in  all  this,  that  the  people  of  the 
Northern  States  could  never  be  reconciled  to  it.  No  candid  man 
could  undertake  to  justify  it  to  them.  He  had  hoped  that  some  accom- 
modation would  have  taken  place  on  this  subject ;  that  at  least  a  time 
would  have  been  limited  for  the  importation  of  slaves.  He  never  could 
agree  to  let  them  be  imported  without  limitation,  and  then  be  repre- 
sented in  the  National  Legislature.  Indeed,  he  could  so  little  per- 
suade himself  of  the  rectitude  of  such  a  practice,  that  he  was  not 
sure  he  could  assent  to  it  under  any  circumstances.  At  all  events, 
either  slaves  should  not  be  represented,  or  exports  should  be  taxable. 

Mr.  Sherman  regarded  the  slave  trade  as  iniquitous  ;  but  the  point 
of  representation  having  been  settled  after  much  difficulty  and  deliber- 


91 

ation,  he  did  not  think  himself  bound  to  make  opposition  ;  especially 
as  the  present  Article,  as  amended,  did  not  preclude  any  arrangement 
whatever  on  that  point,  in  another  place  of  the  Report. 

Mr.  Madison  objected  to  one  for  every  forty  thousand  inhabitants  as 
a  perpetual  rule.  The  future  increase  of  population,  if  the  Union 
should  be  permanent,  will  render  the  number  of  Representatives 
excessive. 

Mr.  Gorhatn.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  the  Government  will 
last  so  long  as  to  produce  this  effect.  Can  it  be  supposed  that  this 
vast  country,  including  the  western  territory,  will,  one  hundred  and 
fifty  years  hence,  remain  one  nation  ? 

Mr.  Ellsworth.  If  the  Government  should  continue  so  long,  alter- 
ations may  be  made  in  the  Constitution  in  the  manner  proposed  in  a 
subsequent  article. 

Mr.  Sherman  and  Mr.  Madison  moved  to  insert  the  words,  "  not 
exceeding,"  before  the  words,  "one  for  every  forty  thousand  ;"  which 
was  agreed  to,  nem.  con. 

Mr.  Gouverneur  Morris  moved  to  insert  "free"  before  the  word 
"  inhabitants."  Much,  he  said,  would  depend  on  this  point.  He 
never  would  concur  in  upholding  domestic  slavery.  I.t  was  a  nefarious 
institution.  It  was  the  curse  of  Heaven  on  the  States  where  it  pre- 
vailed. Compare  the  free  regions  of  the  Middle  States,  where  a  rich 
and  noble  cultivation  marks  the  prosperity  and  happiness  of  the  peo- 
ple, with  the  misery  and  poverty  which  overspread  the  barren  wastes 
of  Virginia,  Maryland,  and  the  other  States  having  slaves..  Travel 
through  the  whole  continent,  and  you  behold  the  prospect  continually 
varying  with  the  appearance  and  disappearance  of  slavery.  The  mo- 
ment you  leave  the  Eastern  States,  and  enter  New  York,  the  effects  of 
the  institution  become  visible.  Passing  through  the  Jerseys  and  en- 
tering Pennsylvania,  every  criterion  of  superior  improvement  witnesses 
the  change.  Proceed  southwardly,  and  every  step  you  take,  through 
the  great  regions  of  slaves,  presents  a  desert  increasing  with  the  in- 
creasing proportion  of  these  wretched  beings.  Upon  what  principle  is 
it  that  the  slaves  shall  be  computed  in  the  representation  ?  Are  they 
men?  Then  make  them  citizens,  and  let  them  vote.  Are  they 
property?  Why,  then,  is  no  other  property  included?  The  houses 
in  this  city  (Philadelphia)  are  worth  more  than  all  the  wretched  slaves 
who  cover  the  rice  swamps  of  South  Carolina.  The  admission  of 
slaves  into  the  representation,  when  fairly  explained,  comes  to  this, 
that  the  inhabitant  of  Georgia  and  South  Carolina  who  goes  to  the 
coast  of  Africa,  and,  in  defiance  of  the  most  sacred  laws  of  humanity, 
tears  away  his  fellow  creatures  from  their  dearest  connections,  and 
damns  them  to  the  most  cruel  bondage,  shall  have  more  votes  in  a 
government  instituted  for  the  protection  of  the  rights  of  mankind, 
than  the  citizen  of  Pennsylvania  or  New  Jersey,  who  \ievvs  with  a 
laudable  horror  so  nefarious  a  practice.  He  would  add,  that  domestic 
slavery  is  the  most  prominent  feature  in  the  aristocratic  countenance 
of  the  proposed  Constitution.  The  vassalage  of  the  poor  has  ever 
been  the  favorite  offspring  of  aristocracy.  And  what  is  the  proposed 
compensation  to  the  Northern  States,  for  a  sacrifice  of  every  principle 
of  right,  of  every  impulse  of  humanity  ?  They  are  to  bind  themselves 
to  march  their  militia  for  the  defence  of  the  Southern  States,  for  their 


92 

defence  against  those  very  slaves  of  whom  they  complain.  They 
must  supply  vessels  and  seamen,  in  case  of  foreign  attack.  The  Leg- 
islature will  have  indefinite  power  to  tax  them  by  excises,  and  duties 
on  imports;  both  of  which  will  fall  heavier  on  them  than  on  the  South- 
ern inhabitants ;  for  the  bohea  tea  used  by  a  Northern  freeman  will 
pay  more  tax  than  the  whole  consumption  of  the  miserable  slave, 
which  consists  of  nothing  more  than  his  physical  subsistence  and  the 
rag  that  covers  his  nakedness.  On  the  other  side,  the  Southern  States 
are  not  to  be  restrained  from  importing  fresh  supplies  of  wretched 
Africans,  at  once  to  increase  the  danger  of  attack,  and  the  difficulty 
of  defence  ;  nay,  they  are  to  be  encouraged  to  it,  by  an  assurance  of 
having  their  votes  in  the  National  Government  increased  in  propor- 
tion ;  and  are,  at  the  same  time,  to  have  their  exports  and  their  slaves 
exempt  from  all  contributions  for  the  public  service.  Let  it  not  be 
said,  that  direct  taxation  is  to  be  proportioned  to  representation.  It  is 
idle  to  suppose  that  the  General  Government  can  stretch  its  hand 
directly  into  the  pockets  of  the  people,  scattered  over  so  vast  a  country. 
They  can  only  do  it  through  the  medium  of  exports,  imports  and  ex- 
cises. For  what,  then,  are  all  the  sacrifices  to  be  made  1  He  would 
sooner  submit  himself  to  a  tax  for  paying  for  all  the  negroes  in  the 
United  States,  than  saddle  posterity  with  such  a  Constitution. 

Mr.  Dayton  seconded  the  motion.  He  did  it,  he  said,  that  his  sen- 
timents on  the  subject  might  appear,  whatever  might  be  the  fate  of  the 
amendment. 

Mr.  Sherman  did  not  regard  the  admission  of  the  negroes  into  the 
ratio  of  representation,  as  liable  to  such  insuperable  objections.  It 
was  the  freemen  of  the  Southern  States  who  were,  in  fact,  to  be  rep- 
resented according  to  the  taxes  paid  by  them,  and  the  negroes  are  only 
included  in  the  estimate  of  the  taxes.  This  was  his  idea  of  the 
matter. 

Mr.  Pinckney  considered  the  fisheries,  and  the  Western  frontier,  as 
more  burthensome  to  the  United  States  than  the  slaves.  He  thought 
this  could  be  demonstrated,  if  the  occasion  were  a  proper  one. 

Mr.  Wilson  thought  the  motion  premature.  An  agreement  to  the 
clause  would  be  no  bar  to  the  object  of  it. 

On  the  question,  on  the  motion  to  insert  "  free  "  before  "  inhabi- 
tants,"— New  Jersey,  aye — 1  ;  New  Hampshire,  Massachusetts,  Con- 
necticut, Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  Maryland,  Virginia,  North  Carolina, 
South  Carolina,  Georgia,  no — 10. — Madison  Papers,  pp.  1261-66. 


LIB 


